The paper introduces LeakGauge, a method that appends a suffix to a model’s input to gauge the risk of context leakage before decoding. By mapping prefill token probabilities to an attack‑risk score, LeakGauge achieves high AUROC (0.944–0.996) across 11 large language models, including GLM‑5.2 and Kimi‑K3, and remains robust to language changes and different attack styles. The approach also demonstrates sensitivity to internal leakage directions and can be implemented with fewer than 0.5K additional parameters and minimal latency.
By Maosen Zhang, Jianshuo Dong, Boting Lu, Wenyue Li, Xiaoping Zhang, Tianwei Zhang, Jie Zhang, Han Qiu
arXiv:2608. 02698v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool-using agents built on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed not by a single operator but by many, side by side on shared infrastructure.
By Mohamed Chahine Ghanem
arXiv:2607. 26849v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are deployed in high-stakes domains, adversaries may poison training data to implant backdoors: hidden triggers that covertly manipulate model behavior at inference time.
By Anthony Hughes, Nicole Xing, Collin Francel, Andy Kim, Andrew Draganov
SpecGuard is an inference‑time backdoor detector that leverages speculative decoding—using a small draft model to propose tokens and a target model to verify them—without adding extra model computation. By monitoring the draft‑token acceptance rate, SpecGuard detects when a target model shifts toward attacker‑controlled behavior while the draft model does not, signaling a backdoor trigger. The method reliably identifies a range of backdoor types, including stealthy attacks that bypass input‑level filters, across multiple model families.
By Rui Wen, Ahmed Salem, Andrew Paverd, Mark Russinovich, Zheng Li
arXiv:2609.36570v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Indirect prompt injection makes an LLM agent treat untrusted retrieved text as instructions. We present CounterSteer, an inference-time defense that...
By Mark Russinovich
arXiv:2607. 24893v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multi-agent LLM systems can be attacked by a payload that no single agent ever holds in full: a poisoned tool hides encrypted fragments in its observations, spreads them across several agents, and an external step reassembles and executes them after the run.
By Diego Fernandez Arias, Dev Prashant Mistry, Ren Wang, Yibo Hu
The paper identifies a vulnerability in large language models where harmful intent can be hidden within benign narratives, a phenomenon termed Semantic Camouflage. By examining latent activation patterns across several small language model families, the authors discover an "Intent Horizon"—a layer depth where harmful intent representations collapse. They propose Latent Intent Verification (LIV), a lightweight probing defense that detects harmful intent in early layers and outperforms existing guardrails on the PKU-SafeRLHF dataset.
By Md. Hasib Ur Rahman
arXiv:2606. 08403v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Text-centered prompt-injection defenses assume that the malicious signal is visible in one of the inspected text views.
By Mudit Sinha, Sanika Chavan
The paper introduces the concept of "linguistic illegibility," describing how a large language model’s (LLM) language outputs and extracted linguistic features may not accurately reflect its internal computations. It argues that because LLMs compute primarily in activation spaces, any reliance on linguistic self‑reporting for security—such as chain‑of‑thought monitoring or constitutional self‑critique—cannot be fully reliable. The authors propose taint tracking and other sandboxing techniques that do not depend on the model’s linguistic state as a more robust security foundation.
By James Mickens
arXiv:2607. 20379v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Natural-language autoencoders score explanations of hidden activations by reconstruction: an explanation is deemed faithful if the activation can be regenerated from it.
By Hiskias Dingeto
arXiv:2606. 29441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Inference-time safety methods for large language models have proliferated, yet no systematic comparison exists.
By Subhadip Mitra
arXiv:2605.21856v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive reasoning abilities across a wide range of tasks, but data contamination undermines...
By Yifan Lan, Yuanpu Cao, Hanyu Wang, Lu Lin, Jinghui Chen