In-house Telecommunications Germany Company newsroom

Deutsche Telekom

Security and Compliance

Conventional low-interaction honeypots are easy for attackers to recognize and abandon, while medium- and high-interaction honeypots are more resource-intensive, harder to manage, and can create greater risk because they rely on more realistic environments and connections to real services.

Reported impact

Business outcome

The AI-enhanced honeypots keep attackers occupied longer, produce more useful intelligence about attacker tactics and tools, and reduce the effort and risk associated with traditional high-interaction honeypots.

  • Cost Reduction
  • Risk Reduction

Solution

Deutsche Telekom uses its T-Pot honeypot platform to run AI-enhanced decoys that keep attackers engaged longer without exposing real production systems. Within T-Pot, the honeypots Galah and Beelzebub use Large Language Models (LLM) to generate dynamic responses instead of the repetitive, generic feedback typical of low-interaction traps. Galah handles web requests as a specialized chatbot that makes an attacker believe actions are changing the target system, while Beelzebub applies the same idea to protocol interactions such as SSH sessions and returns convincing but useless data. T-Pot acts as the umbrella platform that packages these honeypots, while the recorded interaction history is stored as a list for defenders to analyze attacker tactics, techniques, and tools. The design aims to approximate medium- or high-interaction realism with lower operational effort and lower exposure than traditional high-interaction honeypots.

Data flow

Attacker inputs such as web requests and protocol sessions enter T-Pot through Galah and Beelzebub. These honeypots use LLM-driven response generation to return realistic outputs that appear to reflect attacker actions. The resulting interaction trail is then recorded in a list for Deutsche Telekom to analyze attacker tactics, while the attacker remains isolated from real systems.

Solution architecture

4 components · 3 layers
  1. Compute
    • Large Language Models (LLM) The models generate the dynamic responses that make the honeypots appear more realistic and interactive.
  2. Serving
    • Galah This honeypot responds to web requests with realistic, AI-generated behavior to prolong attacker engagement.
    • Beelzebub This honeypot simulates protocol interactions, including SSH, and feeds attackers convincing but worthless responses.
  3. Orchestration
    • T-Pot Deutsche Telekom's honeypot platform packages and runs multiple honeypots for different attack scenarios.

Architecture clues

  • Beelzebub is used for protocol interactions, specifically including SSH.
  • Galah is used for web-request interactions and behaves like a specialized chatbot.
  • T-Pot is described as a globally recognized honeypot platform with multiple honeypot types.
  • The design goal is to deliver medium- or high-interaction behavior with the lower effort of low-interaction honeypots.
  • The system records attacker interactions in a list for later analysis.

Evidence from the source

"AI-supported systems like Galah and Beelzebub simulate a much more dynamic environment. This way, attackers stay engaged longer and generate more valuable data about their tactics and tools."
"Beelzebub follows a similar approach and plays to its strengths particularly in the area of protocols. For example, the so-called SSH protocol."
"During their stay, I gather information about the attack. I learn about strategies, tools used. That's why I note down all interactions in a list."
"Galah responds to web requests and is essentially a highly specialized chatbot."
"The latest members of the family are called Beelzebub and Galah, and they have one thing in common: They use artificial intelligence, specifically the so-called Large Language Models (LLM)."
"With this support, I get the advantages of medium- and high-interaction operational models, but only bear the lower effort of low-interaction honeypots."
Transparency Evidence & methodology 70/100 reference value · 92% confidence · 1 source

Review how this reference was scored and trace each normalized claim back to its documented source.

01

Scoring methodology

How scores are calculated

Customer Reference Value measures usefulness as a customer reference. Evidence Confidence measures the quality and traceability of available evidence, not independent verification.

Customer reference value70/100
  • Problem clarity20/20
    Measures whether the customer's operational problem is specific enough to compare.
  • Implementation depth20/25
    Rewards named components, data flow, integrations, and architecture detail.
  • Outcome specificity20/20
    Measures whether the reported benefit is concrete rather than a generic claim.
  • Quantified impact0/25
    0 metrics describe measurable impact.
  • Deployment scale10/10
    Rewards evidence of a live or scaled deployment and meaningful integration scope.
Evidence confidence92%
  • Source authority25/25
    The deployment is described by the adopting organization or a government source.
  • Claim traceability21/25
    10 of 12 key fields link to a named source.
  • Direct evidence20/20
    6 direct source quotes retained.
  • Date provenance10/10
    The publication date comes from the source page or publisher.
  • Source transparency8/10
    1 source reference document publisher, URL, authority, retrieval, and supported fields.
  • Implementation specificity8/10
    Rewards source-backed components, data flow, quantified impact, and a specific outcome.
02

Traceability

Sources & provenance

Field coverage shows which facts each source supports. Dates are shown only when documented by the source.

  1. Deutsche Telekom

    Deutsche Telekom customer story

    First-party
    https://www.telekom.com/en/newsroom/latest-updates/news/2025/2/honeypot-where-ai-is-unbeatably-efficient
    Source type
    Customer-published story
    Published
    Feb 12, 2025
    Supports
    • Customer
    • Business problem
    • Solution
    • Products
    • Solution components
    • Data flow
    • Integrations
    • technical area
    • use case category
    • Business outcome
    • outcome category
    • Metrics
    • Architecture
    • evidence quotes
    • Publication date

Date evidence

  • Published on source page Feb 12, 2025 · Deutsche Telekom · First-party
    Open date source
Not separately sourced Industry, Region, Company size. Treat these normalized attributes as lower-confidence until a dedicated source is added.