Paper detail

When Intelligence Fails: An Empirical Study on Why LLMs Struggle with Password Cracking

The remarkable capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) in natural language understanding and generation have sparked interest in their potential for cybersecurity applications, including password guessing. In this study, we conduct an empirical investigation into the efficacy of pre-trained LLMs for password cracking using synthetic user profiles. Specifically, we evaluate the performance of state-of-the-art open-source LLMs such as TinyLLaMA, Falcon-RW-1B, and Flan-T5 by prompting them to generate plausible passwords based on structured user attributes (e.g., name, birthdate, hobbies). Our results, measured using Hit@1, Hit@5, and Hit@10 metrics under both plaintext and SHA-256 hash comparisons, reveal consistently poor performance, with all models achieving less than 1.5% accuracy at Hit@10. In contrast, traditional rule-based and combinator-based cracking methods demonstrate significantly higher success rates. Through detailed analysis and visualization, we identify key limitations in the generative reasoning of LLMs when applied to the domain-specific task of password guessing. Our findings suggest that, despite their linguistic prowess, current LLMs lack the domain adaptation and memorization capabilities required for effective password inference, especially in the absence of supervised fine-tuning on leaked password datasets. This study provides critical insights into the limitations of LLMs in adversarial contexts and lays the groundwork for future efforts in secure, privacy-preserving, and robust password modeling.

preprint2025arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.