Extracting Forgotten Prompts from Targeted Unlearned Models

Recent unlearning methods (e.g. NPO, DPO, LUNAR) make use of refusal alignment to suppress forgotten data. However, it has been shown that refusal responses might leave traces of unlearning, and recent attacks have been able to successfully recover some of the unlearned knowledge. In this paper, we uncover a new vulnerability. Existing attacks typically assume that the forgotten prompts are already known to the adversary and focus on recovering their answers. However, we show that the forgotten prompts themselves can be extracted by using the retained data and black-box access to the model. Our attack, Targeted Active Search (TAS), first identifies the forgotten entities by constructing canonical templates and entity pool, and selectively querying the model using the most informative template-entity pair under a limited query budget. Once the entities are identified, TAS instantiates prompt templates with those entities to probe the unlearned model and reconstruct the forgotten prompts. Experiments across three unlearning methods with three datasets and three LLMs shows that TAS recovers the forgotten entity with $100\%$ accuracy and reconstructs up to $95\%$ of forgotten prompts, all while using up to $99.7\%$ fewer queries than naive probing.

When Optimization Becomes Manipulation: Defending Generative Search against Malicious Generative Engine Optimization

This paper focuses on defending generative search engines against malicious Generative Engine Optimization (GEO), which rewrites web documents to match engines' citation preferences and thereby manipulates generated answers. Recent GEO methods have advanced from hand-crafted rewriting to automated and agentic optimization, substantially increasing the visibility of target documents in generated answers. However, defending against such manipulation poses two major challenges: attack documents remain factually consistent with their originals, rendering fact verification and perplexity filtering ineffective, and the features they amplify equally characterize high-quality benign content. To address these limitations, we propose GEO Defender, a two-stage defense aligned with the attack chain that requires no fine-tuning of the target LLM. GEO Defender consists of Shield Reranker and Training-Free Shield Generation (TFSG). Specifically, Shield Reranker learns a preference-based defensive residual over a frozen base reranker, demoting GEO-rewritten documents while preserving relevance judgments, and TFSG distills defense outcomes into a natural-language experience library that guides the target LLM's source use at inference. Experiments on two state-of-the-art closed-source LLMs and three open-source LLMs across seven GEO attacks demonstrate that GEO Defender reduces the average attack success rate from 50.32% to 6.20%, retains 94.12% of benign-evidence use, preserves answer quality, and generalizes to unseen attacks from construction instances.

A Comprehensive Survey on Linguistic Steganography: Methods, Countermeasures, Evaluation, and Challenges

Linguistic steganography hides secret messages in natural language text. Large language models (LLMs) have reshaped the field, but a systematic account of how these scattered advances collectively reshape the field in this new era is still missing. We provide one along four axes: 148 steganographic methods, 60 linguistic steganalysis countermeasures, 23 evaluation metrics, and 9 open challenges, each with taxonomies, reviews, and adoption analyses. Cutting across these axes, we identify five specific paradigm shifts in the LLM era: (1) from covertext modification to prompt-only generation, (2) from heuristic to provable security, (3) from white-box symmetric LMs to black-box or asymmetric access, (4) from security-centric designs to joint optimization, and (5) from text-quality concerns to engineering issues. The survey aims to serve as both a reference and a roadmap for practical and responsible linguistic steganography in the LLM era.

Quantization-Triggered Backdoors in Language Models: Cross-Quantizer Transferability and the Validation--Deployment Gap

Post-training quantization is often treated as a semantically neutral optimization for edge deployment of Large Language Models. When a full-precision source checkpoint is evaluated and quantization is applied downstream without equivalent re-evaluation, this workflow creates a structural validation--deployment gap: because quantization is a many-to-one mapping over parameter space, source-precision certification does not guarantee behavioral equivalence in the deployed configuration. We formalize this gap through Quantization Behavioral Equivalence Classes (QBECs) and prove that QBEC membership does not imply behavioral equivalence, providing a theoretical basis for quantization-triggered backdoor attacks. Building on a three-stage adversarial fine-tuning framework, we embed latent malicious payloads into models that satisfy the source-precision checks used in our evaluation, yet activate targeted adversarial behavior upon INT8 or 4-bit compression. We evaluate this threat in two operationally motivated scenarios, tactical machine translation and political content analysis, extending prior work from decoder-only causal LMs to multilingual encoder-decoder sequence-to-sequence models. Results show that backdoored translation models move from zero measured friend--foe corruption at repaired FP16 to up to 85.02% inversion after quantization, and that a paired stance classifier measures an ideological shift of up to $Δ\mathrm{Bias}=0.33$ upon compression. A cross-quantizer transferability analysis further shows that attack persistence varies across quantization schemes and model architectures, rather than being determined by nominal bit-width alone. These findings demonstrate that source-precision auditing alone does not rule out quantization-triggered behavior and that the final deployed configuration must be included in behavioral certification for trustworthy edge AI.

Groundhog Bit-Flip Attack: Seeding Infinite Generation Loops in Mixture-of-Experts LLMs through Bit Flips

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures enable scalable and efficient large language models (LLMs) by selectively activating expert sub-networks through a routing mechanism. However, this adaptive design introduces a new attack surface: specific experts become disproportionately correlated with certain tokens (e.g., end-of-sequence), allowing adversaries to manipulate model behavior via lightweight perturbations. In this work, we present \textbf{Groundhog Bit-Flip Attack (GBFA)}, the first bit-flip-based \textit{ Denial-of-Wallet availability attack} against MoE-based LLMs. By identifying and flipping routing-layer bits associated with related expert activations, we demonstrate that GBFA substantially extends the decoding token usage across three different LLM modes: conversational, reasoning, and agentic tasks, while largely preserving semantic fidelity. Across four main real-world MoE-based LLMs, manually deactivating on average fewer than \textbf{4 experts} drives average output inflation to $\mathbf{5912\%}$, with the majority of test samples reaching max tokens. These results reveal a robustness vulnerability of MoE architectures to bit flip, and highlight the potential of GBFA as an availability attack against LLMs.

Adversarial Entropy Inflation Against Gumbel-Based Inference Verification

Gumbel-based inference verification bounds LLM weight exfiltration by only forgiving token choices that plausibly arise from honest GPU nondeterminism, reporting a >200x slowdown for a steganographic adversary under benign prompt traffic. This bound assumes a passive attacker; we show it degrades sharply against an adversary who instead controls the prompt distribution. Because the verifier's admissible-token-set size is driven by the model's own output entropy, prompts engineered to break grammatical and sub-word structure -- rather than benign conversational traffic -- widen that set and open a materially larger covert channel. Across six instruction-tuned models spanning 1B to 32B parameters and three random seeds, our strongest attack (character- and script-level disruption) roughly doubles bits leaked per token relative to benign prompts, cutting the slowdown factor to 60x - 118x. These results indicate that static, benign-traffic-calibrated thresholds are insufficient for this defense, and that jitter-forgiveness thresholds should instead be calibrated dynamically against local token entropy.

SecOPD: Mitigating Adaptive Prompt Injections by On-Policy Distillation

Prompt injection is listed as the \#1 threat to AI agents. When an agent accesses external data from websites, files, or emails, an attacker may inject a prompt into the data, saying, "Ignore all prior instructions and perform <an attacker's task>." To prevent arbitrary manipulation of agents, defenders try to train secure LLMs, which, however, still suffer from near 100% attack success rates (ASRs) against adaptive prompt injections. We note that this is because existing defensive finetuning recipes rely on sequence-level feedback signals (in DPO or GRPO). Treating an entire output equally prevents the model from learning precisely which output tokens are insecure. In this paper, we propose Secure On-Policy Distillation (SecOPD) that provides token-level feedback to guide defensive fine-tuning. The LLM receives an injected sample and produces a rollout, whose tokens are scored by the initialization model given the corresponding clean input. With more fine-grained training signals, our defended Qwen3.6-27B achieves a 9.0% ASR against the SoTA PISmith adaptive prompt injections, compared to 94.0% for the prior SoTA, Meta-SecAlign. The obtained security generalizes to domains completely unseen in training: in agentic tool calling, SecOPD achieves a 4.7% ASR compared to 5.5% for Meta-SecAlign. Code and the model are available at https://github.com/pppyb/SecOPD and https://huggingface.co/pybbb/Qwen3.6-27B-SecOPD.

The Model's Tell: Measuring Context-Leakage Attack Signals with Behavior Gauges

LLMs increasingly rely on external contexts, such as pre-defined system prompts or retrieved documents, to improve generation quality. However, processing these contexts alongside user queries creates an attack surface: adversarial inputs can induce models to disclose them. Prior probing studies suggest that leakage-related signals emerge in hidden states, yet the need to extract these states poses additional deployment challenges. In this paper, we explore whether this internal signal leaves a more accessible ``tell'' before decoding. We propose LeakGauge, which probes this response by appending a suffix that gauges leakage behavior and mapping its prefill token probabilities to an attack-risk score. While a direct gauge uses the initial tokens of confidential content, we find that a content-agnostic one that verbalizes leakage behavior yields more robust signals. Across 11 LLMs, including GLM-5.2 (753B) and Kimi-K3 (2.8T), LeakGauge reaches an AUROC range of 0.944--0.996 on unseen attacks. The signal remains stable when the content changes language or the attack shifts from verbatim to semantic disclosure. By activation-steering interventions, we further show that the risk score is sensitive to an internal leakage-related direction, relating the observable signal to the model's internal representation. In addition, LeakGauge enables an input detector with fewer than 0.5K extra parameters and added latency of 10.34 ms. Code: \href{https://github.com/yeasen-z/LeakGauge}.

Incident-Data Robustness Analysis of the OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications (2026): How a Community-Expert Ranking Holds Up Against a Large-Scale LLM Incident Corpus

The OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications ranks the risks that a community of security practitioners judges most important. We ask a narrower question: checked against the record of real incidents, does that expert ranking agree with the data? We assembled a large-scale corpus of LLM-security incidents (7,714 snapshotted and 6,639 labeled against the 20-entry taxonomy) drawn from CVE, GHSA, OSV, and AIAAIC, and derived an incident-based ranking with a Bayesian measurement-error model that corrects each category's count for classifier precision and recall. The 2026 candidate list blends the two signals at fixed weights, 0.75 on the expert vote and 0.25 on the data, so the corpus corrects the consensus without overturning it. The agreement between the two rankings is weak: Cohen's $κ\approx 0.20$, with a 90% interval that crosses zero. The expert ranking is nonetheless robust. A pre-registered bake-off of four frontier classifiers returns no winner. None beats the incidence floor's balanced accuracy of 0.863. A ground-truth check leaves the floor's ordering (Spearman $ρ= 0.918$ against held-out truth) in place. This is an exploratory analysis by two working-group members, not the official OWASP release, and it does not supersede the official list or process.

Decomposition Attacks Across Unlinkable Identities: Limits of Stateful Defenses for LLM Services

Most large language model services use stateless defenses, which judge only the current request, to refuse harmful tasks. Decomposition attacks exploit this limitation by splitting a harmful task into individually permissible requests and combining their answers. Defending against them therefore requires a stateful monitor that considers requests together. If it can group all requests for one attacker task, it can stop the attack. However, attackers can use unlinkable identities and combine answers elsewhere, leaving no reliable grouping signal. We ask whether decomposition attacks can still be stopped under this setting. For a fixed attack strategy without retries, we prove that the achievable security and utility tradeoff depends entirely on how benign requests for the same capabilities are grouped. Persistent, recognizable groups permit a useful defense; fresh, indistinguishable groups do not. When attackers can retry and learn from Allow/Block decisions, this useful operating point disappears: the feedback reveals what passes but not whether a block was correct. Experiments on 91 executable tasks and 11,393 capability-matched benign requests support these results. Under a 1% denial cap for these requests and a 0.5% cap for unrelated background traffic, all ten tested policies, including one privileged policy with an exact request-to-operation map, either fail to stop attacks or exceed the budget. On defense-unseen task families, attack success is at least 99% after one attempt and 100% after two. Effective defenses therefore require additional evidence or mechanisms tied to grouping, such as reliable identity linkage, costs for fresh identities, or control over answer use.

Probing the Prefill: Detecting Code Vulnerabilities via Latent Activations

LLM-based code generation is now embedded in mission-critical pipelines, but defenses against vulnerable output remain post-hoc -- static analyzers, fine-tuned classifiers, or an LLM judge that screen completed code, ignoring the generating model's own internal state. We test a narrower, directly measurable question: when an LLM reads a piece of C/C++ code as context, do its hidden activations already carry a signal about that code's vulnerability status? We extract last prefill token activations from four LLMs (Granite-4.1-8B, Qwen3.5-9B, Qwen3.6-27B, Gemma-4-12B) across three model families and train MLP probes on these activations. We evaluate them on four function-level C/C++ benchmarks (Devign, Big-Vul, Draper VDISC, PrimeVul). Our probes achieve 41.7\% average F1 using 13.4--16.0M-parameter probes -- under 0.2\% of base-model size. On Devign, the best probe (Qwen3.5-9B, 68.8\% F1) matches the published fine-tuned-classifier SOTA (67.9\%) despite reading only a frozen, general-purpose LLM's activations; on the harder, more imbalanced benchmarks (Big-Vul, Draper VDISC, PrimeVul) probes trail SOTA substantially. This is early evidence that a coding LLM's own representation of arbitrary code is informative about that code's vulnerability status, motivating further work toward lightweight, model-native vulnerability screening.

Breaking and Defending LLM-Powered Social Media Bot Detection Systems

The rise of social media bots poses a persistent threat, enabling misinformation, opinion manipulation, and the erosion of trust in online platforms. To combat this, machine learning systems have been developed to detect and limit bot activity, but attackers continuously adapt through techniques such as adversarial learning and behavior imitation, fueling an ongoing arms race between bots and detection tools. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have significantly improved bot detection by enabling deeper semantic and contextual analysis of accounts and their content. However, this shift also introduces new attack surfaces, allowing adversaries to craft exploits that directly target the reasoning and generation mechanisms of LLM-based classifiers. Industry tools such as Anthropic's Claude Code Security similarly leverage LLMs for security-critical decisions, further motivating a careful study of their attack surfaces. In this work, we investigate both the offensive and defensive aspects of LLM-powered, threat-specific cybersecurity applications. While centered on the challenge of social media bot detection, our methodology and insights generalize to a broad class of LLM-powered cybersecurity systems, including phishing detection, email classification, and fraud analysis. We introduce two novel adversarial attack strategies that systematically exploit the semantic and contextual weaknesses of LLM-based classifiers, degrading their detection accuracy by up to 48%. To counter these threats, we propose a robust multi-LLM defense architecture designed to preserve detection reliability under adaptive adversarial conditions. Our solution, LSABRE (LLM-powered Social Adversarial Bot Recognition Ensemble), is a multi-LLM framework that substantially improves robustness across a range of attacks, maintaining 86% detection accuracy even under strong, adaptive adversarial pressure.

Detecting Contaminated Code-Generation Prompt Batches via Influence Functions

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for code generation, yet they remain vulnerable to prompts that elicit insecure implementations. Existing defenses typically rely on predefined threat models or known vulnerability patterns, limiting their effectiveness against novel attacks. We propose CodeSIFT, a threat-model-agnostic detection method that leverages influence functions to identify batches of prompts that induce anomalous model behavior. Rather than detecting specific vulnerabilities, CodeSIFT measures the parameter-space influence of generated code and uses a statistical test to determine whether a candidate prompt set deviates from a benign reference distribution. To evaluate our approach, we introduce two benchmark datasets covering a variety of vulnerabilities. We evaluate CodeSIFT on three open-weight code LLMs ranging from 3B to 7B parameters, achieving AUROC scores of up to 0.98 at moderate-to-high injection rates, while maintaining well-calibrated false positive rates and substantially outperforming static analysis baselines. These results suggest that influence-function-based detection is a promising direction for identifying malicious code-generation prompts without requiring prior knowledge of the underlying attack class.

Privacy-Preserving RAG by Concealing Sensitive Information from External LLMs

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is widely used to improve the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs) in answering user queries. Existing privacy research on RAG has focused on preventing unauthorized users from accessing sensitive data. However, another important problem that is often overlooked in RAG privacy research is that external generators have access to the query and the retrieved documents, which may contain confidential information that could potentially be misused or accessed for unintended purposes. In this paper, we introduce the Sensitive Entity Alias Generator (SEAG), a privacy-preserving framework that empowers users to utilize powerful third-party generators without disclosing sensitive information. SEAG introduces a lightweight model that locates sensitive entities, generates corresponding aliases, and constructs an entity replacement table. The table is used to replace sensitive words in the user's query and in the retrieved documents before they are forwarded to an external generator. For this purpose, two datasets were constructed: one for fine-tuning SEAG models to generate entity replacement tables, and another for evaluating the entire SEAG framework. The experimental results demonstrate the success of the SEAG framework. As for the User metric, which measures the ability of the model to provide a correct response to the user while hiding sensitive information from the external generator, all SEAG models achieved over 80% accuracy. Additional analysis further evaluated the ability of SEAG models Qwen-3, LLaMA-3.2, and Phi-4 to hide all sensitive entities within given documents. The results show good performance with total accuracies of 77.83%, 76.73%, and 74.91%, respectively.

Non-Degenerate Risk Certification for Automated Security Decisions: A Decision-Contract Theory with ATT\&CK-Aligned Triage as a Worked Instance

An unconditional risk bound on automated decisions can be satisfied without automating anything, since a selector that never acts drives the bound to zero. We show this is structural: any risk certificate is defined over a decision contract, the inputs a system acts on plus the semantic relation under which an output counts correct, and weakening either hides base-classifier error. We develop a decision-contract theory: an error-conservation law showing error is only reassigned among harmful automation, human deferral, and semantic masking; a label-free singleton capacity certifying structural incapacity, with a risk-feasible refinement separating recoverable threshold misalignment from risk-constrained incapacity; and a non-degenerate actionability certificate excluding all-abstain solutions by construction. We instantiate this on ATT\&CK-aligned alert triage for LLM-based intrusion detection, the setting that exposed the vacuity failure. Across 3 IDS datasets, 6 LLMs, and 4 error-rate thresholds, empirical false-attribution risk stays at or below target in 90.3% of configurations, with 83.4% mean correct automation. The capacity diagnostic explains every low-utility configuration; its refinement separates genuine misalignment from risk-constrained incapacity, confirmed by an exhibited alternative threshold; a training-stability re-run finds no confirmed structural-incapacity instance; and real fine-grained attack-subtype labels confirm the coarsening-transfer identity under a genuine many-to-one map, with small but non-zero masking mass.

Synchronized Logit Steering: Real-world Steganography

Steganography in large language models offers a way to embed hidden messages within natural-sounding text. Existing token and logit-level methods typically require the sender and receiver to share an identical prompt context, which is rarely guaranteed in production pipelines that use retrieval-augmented generation or proprietary system instructions. We introduce Synchronized Logit Steering (SLS), a deterministic steganographic scheme that eliminates this dependency by deriving a proxy prompt from the generated output itself, allowing both parties to reconstruct the same logit distribution without access to the original prompt. SLS encodes payload values as token ranks within high-entropy regions of the proxy prompt distribution, and we extend the scheme with periodic recurrence and payload bursts to scale information density. Across ShareGPT, GSM8K, and SWE-bench Verified, we show that the KL divergence between the true and proxy prompt distributions falls below 0.5 nats once the synchronization window reaches 40 tokens, and SLS encoding does not meaningfully disrupt this convergence relative to greedy generation. We also find that the periodic-burst variant achieves 0.20 bits per token, or roughly 10x the capacity of single-payload encoding. Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests further confirm that SLS outputs are statistically difficult to distinguish from greedy generations, demonstrating that covert, prompt-agnostic communication through LLMs is both practical and stealthy.

BASIS: Breach-Aware Selective Prompt Injection Shielding with Prefill Attention Probes

Prompt injection is a critical security threat in large language model (LLM) applications, where attackers hijack model behavior by embedding malicious instructions in user or external data. Existing detection methods only detect the presence of injection and refuse to respond upon detection, overlooking the fact that for many modern aligned models, well-crafted instructions can resist most injection attacks. This means that the injection robustness varies significantly across instructions and models. This leads to widespread unnecessary over-refusal: inputs containing injections that the model could have handled correctly are rejected incorrectly. To deal with this over-refusal issue, we propose BASIS (Robustness-Aware Prompt Injection Defense). This defense method uses the Attention Competition Ratio ($ρ$) as features to train two sparse linear probes: an existence probe and a breach probe. Both probes make defense decisions through cascaded gating, which does not require additional LLM inference. BASIS comprises three stages: injection existence detection, per-sample breach prediction, and instruction robustness assessment; the online cascade refuses only when the model would actually be compromised and thus avoids over-refusal on robust instructions. Experiments across four tasks and six open-source LLMs show that BASIS maintains near-perfect injection detection while substantially reducing over-refusal on safe attack samples, especially under robust instruction templates.

LoRAScan: Detecting Backdoor Prompts in Low-Rank Adapters for Large Language Models via Down-Projection Activation Spikes

Low-rank adaptation (LoRA) enables efficient specialization and distribution of large language models through compact adapters. However, untrusted adapters introduce a supply-chain threat: a backdoored adapter can cause a model to generate harmful content, malicious code, political propaganda, or covert advertisements when an input contains a hidden trigger. Adapter-agnostic defenses merge the adapter with the base model, which dilutes backdoor signals and reduces detection performance. Existing adapter-aware methods do not address how to safely use a potentially backdoored adapter. Instead, they either train a defensive adapter to repair a backdoored base model, addressing the inverse problem rather than securing the adapter itself, or rely on a classifier that flags the entire adapter as suspicious and requires separate mitigation. These methods overlook the distinct latent-space signatures produced by trigger-bearing inputs in backdoored adapters. We introduce LoRAScan, the first adapter-aware defense that detects and rejects trigger-bearing inputs at inference time without modifying adapter parameters. Our key observation is that a small subset of LoRA insertion sites, approximately 5%, remains stable across clean inputs but exhibits highly concentrated spikes in LoRA down-projection activations when a trigger is present. LoRAScan identifies these low-variance insertion sites before model deployment and monitors them during inference. Across standard LLM backdoor benchmarks, LoRAScan rejects approximately 98.49 of malicious inputs with a small error rate on clean inputs, outperforming existing defenses across diverse evaluation settings.

Hardware Design and Security in the Era of Chiplets and LLMs

The semiconductor industry is undergoing a dual revolution: the shift toward heterogeneous 2.5D chiplet systems and the integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) into Electronic Design Automation (EDA) flows. While these paradigms offer unprecedented benefits in yield, modularity, design productivity, etc., they radically expand the hardware attack surface. This paper provides a unified analysis of these frontiers, ranging from attacks on chiplet systems (including hardware stacks for LLM acceleration) across architectural, logical, and physical levels, to various exploits against LLM-driven EDA pipelines. To secure chiplet systems, we review a powerful defense approach that leverages 2.5D split manufacturing and active interposers for physically isolated Root of Trust (RoT) architectures. To secure LLM-driven EDA pipelines, we first identify native threats and then review state-of-the-art defense techniques. Finally, we discuss how LLM systems can advance hardware security efforts for modern systems, including chiplets.

An Inline Control Architecture for Language Models in Intelligent Transportation Systems

Vehicle-to-everything (V2X) systems increasingly incorporate large language models (LLMs) for semantic tasks such as message summarization, operator assistance, and decision support at roadside units and edge nodes. Although these components are not part of safety-critical control loops, they introduce prompt-level attack surfaces that are not addressed by traditional V2X security mechanisms focused on authentication and message integrity. This paper presents Guarded-V2X, an inline semantic guardrail architecture for securing LLM-enabled V2X services under real-time constraints. The proposed system integrates rule-based ingress filtering, a lightweight safety classifier, policy-constrained structured generation, trusted-only retrieval, and post-decision adjudication to enforce machine-checkable safety boundaries prior to downstream execution. Guarded-V2X is evaluated using a four-stage experimental pipeline encompassing intrusion vulnerability analysis, calibration and latency benchmarking, guardrail validation, and robustness under adversarial stress. Experiments are conducted on a V2X-aligned simulated dataset derived from RSU advisories, operator messages, and annotated V2X message summaries. Results show that unguarded and prompt-only baselines retain residual vulnerability under multi-turn adversarial trials, while Guarded-V2X consistently reduces intrusion acceptance success rates and eliminates observed unsafe completions in two-turn settings, without exceeding latency budgets for V2X semantic advisory paths.

A Security-Oriented Lifecycle Model for Large Language Model Systems

Large language models are being integrated into critical infrastructure and enterprise workflows at unprecedented scale,yet the lifecycle frameworks governing their development and operations were designed for operational efficiency rather than security analysis. As a result, security-relevant activities such as data provenance verification, artifact signing, agentic permission control, and decommissioning are often left implicit or assumed to receive due care. Governance frameworks, in turn, organise requirements around risk levels or management processes without clearly linking them to the lifecycle stages where they apply. This paper addresses both deficiencies. We propose a lifecycle model for LLM systems that supports security analysis by structuring it around security-relevant boundaries rather than workflow optimisation. The model comprises 32 stages across four core pipeline layers (Data, Model, Distribution, Application), supported by a 12-stage LLMOps pillar and a 9-category governance pillar. Thirteen stages are introduced here as separate units because they expose distinct security concerns that existing frameworks do not clearly distinguish. A governance mapping synthesising the NIST AI RMF, the EU AI Act, and ISO/IEC 42001 reveals a structural property of the current regulatory landscape: governance evidence concentrates at deployment-facing stages, where systems are visible to regulators, while the most consequential decisions, data selection, alignment strategy, and capability boundaries, are made at development-facing stages, where regulatory visibility is lowest.

DenialRAG: Single-Document RAG Poisoning via Embedded Parametric Denial

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems are vulnerable to corpus poisoning: an attacker who inserts a crafted document into the retrieval corpus can steer the underlying large language model (LLM) toward an attacker-chosen wrong answer. Prior single-document attacks typically avoid explicitly naming and refuting the correct answer inside the poisoned passage. In this paper, we examine a complementary design and propose \emph{DenialRAG}, a single-document poisoning attack that explicitly names the correct answer, denies it, and presents an attacker-controlled explanation for favoring the wrong answer. By placing both the correct answer and the corresponding poisoned answer inside the same retrieved passage, DenialRAG embeds the conflict directly into the context seen by the generator. We evaluate DenialRAG against four published single-document poisoning attacks across three open-domain question-answering datasets, eight target LLMs from four vendors, and five inference-time defenses. The results show that attack effectiveness is strongly model-dependent: DenialRAG achieves the highest attack success rate (ASR) on all three Mistral-7B datasets and remains effective on several other target LLMs, while other attacks dominate in some model regimes. Defense results show meaningful ASR reductions but non-uniform protection, with each defense leaving residual ASR in some settings. Component-level and cross-model analyses further identify the embedded denial as the most influential tested component and show that different poisoning mechanisms lose effectiveness at different rates across model groups. Together, these results show that RAG poisoning risk cannot be fully characterized by a single attack family or a single target model.

When Collaboration Becomes a Trigger: Collective Evidence-Threshold Backdoors in Multi-Agent Systems

LLM-based multi-agent systems (MAS) extend LLM capabilities through iterative communication and shared contexts. However, this collaboration introduces a vulnerability: backdoor behavior can be activated when peer evidence reaches a hidden threshold, rather than being determined by any single message. We introduce a collective evidence-threshold backdoor paradigm for MAS and Boundary-Conditioned Backdoor Injection (BCBI), which constructs counterfactual boundary pairs to separate benign behavior before the threshold from the adversarial objective after it, and learns latent progression aligned with evidence. To mitigate this threat, we propose LAtent Transition Test-time Evaluation (LATTE), a clean-only latent-transition defense that learns benign communication dynamics and quarantines anomalous agent updates before their responses propagate. Across several benchmarks, BCBI yields selective activation with little premature activation; without knowing the attack target or trigger, LATTE limits propagation with minimal disruption.

HoF-Bench: Rediscovering Real AI-Discovered CVEs Without Frontier Models

LLM-based analyzers have begun finding real vulnerabilities in mature open-source projects: AISLE's analyzer is credited with more than 280 CVEs across 78 projects, including OpenSSL, curl, and GnuTLS. We introduce HoF-Bench (named after AISLE's public Hall of Fame), a benchmark built from 95 of these public AI-discovered CVEs across eight repositories pinned at vulnerable commits. Analyzers receive source and target-file scope but not CVE identifiers, descriptions, fixes, or expected mechanisms; a detector-blinded frontier-model judge credits only findings that identify the same code path, root cause, attack condition, and impact. A deliberately minimal LLM-based analyzer rediscovers up to 65 of the 95 CVEs (68%) under this strict protocol. No frontier model performs detection anywhere in the study. The ten detector backbones are five open-weight models (21B--284B total parameters, 3--13B active) and five proprietary small or "flash"-tier models. All of them run in the fixed scaffold with four repeated passes, an optional generated-context stage, and a replayable multi-round triage stage (7,600 model--CVE pass records). Difficulty is strongly structured by language; the CVEs missed by every model concentrate in C infrastructure code. HoF-Bench provides a compact test bed for comparing vulnerability scanners, their reliability across repeated runs, and the candidate volume they create. The dataset is available at https://huggingface.co/datasets/aisleinc/HoF-Bench.

Construction-Driven Injection: Linguistically-Grounded Edit-Based Code-Mixing Fingerprints for Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) are costly intellectual assets that remain exposed to unauthorized redistribution and commercial misuse. Injected fingerprints, i.e., trigger--target pairs embedded in model behavior, offer a practical, black-box-verifiable ownership signal, but existing methods decouple the two stages of the fingerprint life cycle: how a fingerprint is constructed and how it is injected. Existing fingerprinting frameworks suffer from two limitations. Natural-language fingerprints are prone to accidental activation, and garbled fingerprints are easily filtered by perplexity-based detection. Furthermore, decoupling construction from injection leaves the latter unaware of the trigger's linguistic structure, missing the opportunity for targeted optimization. We argue that fingerprint construction should drive injection, and present a unified fingerprinting framework that jointly optimizes both stages. First, LCF constructs code-mixing fingerprints by combining low-resource languages under a semantic-density substitution rule and grammar-biased mixing, yielding triggers whose perplexity sits far below garbled baselines while avoiding the accidental-activation failures of natural-language triggers. Second, LCFEdit injects each fingerprint with a null-space projection derived from high-resource multilingual representations that preserves knowledge, augmented by a cross-lingual alignment step that steers the weight update toward the fingerprint language's representation subspace. This construction-aware injection ensures that the update is linguistically informed and therefore more stable. Extensive evaluations on imperceptibility, detectability, and harmlessness demonstrate persistent ownership verification with negligible impact on utility.

Decision-Level Hijacking: Injecting Cognitive Bias into Large Language Models via Bit-Flip Attacks

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely applied in high-stakes decision-making scenarios such as corporate strategy, and users are increasingly relying on their outputs. However, the deep integration of open-source model sharing ecosystems with LLM-powered critical decision-making applications also introduces critical risks: if an attacker can manipulate the model's cognitive stance, they can indirectly influence the judgments and actions of downstream decision-makers. This paper defines such threats as decision-level hijacking. Existing attacks fail to achieve targeted cognitive manipulation without triggering prohibited content or degrading model functionality. To fill this gap, this paper reveals that Bit-Flip Attacks (BFAs) can serve as an attack vector for inducing decision-level hijacking, requiring no real-time interaction or control over the training process, and only a minimal number of weight bits need to be flipped after deployment to achieve stealthy, low-cost, and persistent cognitive manipulation. Therefore, we propose CogBias, a cognitive bias injection framework for LLMs. CogBias converts subjective preferences into optimization signals via a differentiable sentiment evaluator, uses a multi-objective loss to jointly constrain multiple dimensions, and constructs BitScout to locate critical bits, achieving targeted cognitive intervention under an ultra-sparse flip budget. Experiments on Llama-3.2-3B, Mistral-7B, and Qwen2.5-14B, as well as on the commercial recommendation and controversial factual topic scenarios, demonstrate that flipping only a small number of bits stably induces significant stance shifts on target topics, while the impact on non-target tasks and overall output distribution is limited. This work demonstrates that minute perturbations to low-level weight data suffice to undermine the high-level value alignment of LLMs.

Early Detection of Distributed Backdoors in Multi-Agent LLM Systems: A Characterization Study

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. Per-step safety checks that judge each action in isolation may fail to recognize the complete distributed payload. We investigate how early such an attack can be detected while the run is still unfolding, and how robustly it can be caught once its most obvious cues are stripped away. We build a working instance on a hierarchical multi-agent system, run it under benign and attacked conditions across five language models and two task domains, and record when each fragment is injected and when the payload is assembled and executed. Detection is a race against assembly. Before the first fragment is injected, attacked and benign runs are indistinguishable; once injection begins, a prefix detector flags $99.3\%$ of successful attacks with a median of five steps remaining and a $10.3\%$ safe-run false-positive rate. Because assembly occurs only after the run, these alarms arrive in time to abort nearly every successful attack. We then measure how much of that warning rests on removable surface cues of the attack rather than on its distributed structure. Generic zero-shot and behavior-trained detectors provide almost no warning at all; the detectors that do work lean in part on removable surface cues, chiefly the ciphertext's length and entropy, and once the entropy cue is removed from the payload and the length features from the detector, detection arrives later and transfers poorly across domains, though a fine-tuned model recovers some of the loss.

HijackKV: New Threat in Position-Independent KV Cache Reuse

Key-Value (KV) cache reduces inference latency in large language models (LLMs). Traditional prefix-based reuse has low cache hit rates across inference requests because it requires exact token and position matches. To improve efficiency, recent system optimizations introduce position-independent KV reuse, allowing KV cache to be reused whenever identical text chunks appear, regardless of their position in the sequence. We show this design introduces a new threat, KV Cache Hijacking. Since KV caches are retrieved by token match but encode the context in which they were originally computed, the KV tied to a benign-looking token chunk may encode an attacker-controlled prefix. When later reused in a victim query, this contaminated KV silently hijacks the model's behavior, even if no attacker-controlled text appears in the input. We introduce HIJACKKV, the first attack framework that systematically exploits this vulnerability, demonstrating its severity and practicality. HIJACKKV optimizes an attacker-controlled prefix, so that the KV computed for a subsequent common benign text encodes the attacker's goal, while the text remains unchanged for future cache hits. HIJACKKV achieves an average 94% success rate in a single attempt, remains effective under realistic constraints including low hit rates (10%) and frequent recomputation (50%), persists over multi-turn interactions, and transfers across models in black-box settings. We further provide design insights for building secure KV reuse systems.

Defense Against LLM Backdoors using Critical Neuron Isolation Pruning

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to backdoor attacks, where hidden triggers induce malicious outputs. Existing defenses generally fall into inference-time detection or training-time mitigation, but face two key limitations. First, they focus on fine-tuning-based backdoors (e.g., PEFT modules) and fail to address insidious model-editing attacks that bypass training pipelines. Second, they target simple classification settings and do not naturally extend to open-ended LLM generation and do not naturally extend to the open-ended generation characteristics of LLMs. Consequently, these methods focus on surface-level behavioral patterns while neglecting the deeper representational causes of malicious activations. This lack of mechanistic understanding forces defenses to depend on empirical heuristics, limiting their robustness, generality, and practical applicability in real-world LLM deployment. To bridge this gap, we introduce DeCNIP (Defense with Critical Neuron Isolation Pruning), which leverages representational analysis to identify and neutralize backdoors in a unified pipeline. Specifically, DeCNIP identifies trigger-like behaviors by optimizing a cross-entropy loss between harmful prompts with candidate tokens and benign inputs. This representational discovery exposes latent threats by uncovering mechanisms through which triggers hijack model weights. It then isolates Backdoor Critical Neurons (BCNs) and prunes them selectively to remove malicious influence while preserving model utility. Extensive evaluations on six open-source LLMs and two benchmark datasets demonstrate that DeCNIP achieves over 95% relative reduction in Attack Success Rate (ASR), outperforming seven state-of-the-art defenses with only 0.1% neuron intervention. Moreover, it maintains 97% of the model's performance on normal benchmarks, demonstrating its efficacy, robustness, and scalability.

CPInj: Uncovering Prompt Injection Risks in Textual Collaborative Prompt Optimization

Textual Collaborative Prompt Optimization (TCPO) extends Textgrad (Yuksekgonul et al., 2025) to a decentralized setting by allowing multiple clients to jointly improve prompts for large language models (LLMs) while keeping their data locally. Its reliance on free-form textual updating and aggregation introduces a new and largely unexplored attack surface, i.e., malicious instructions can be injected into local prompts and propagated through server-side prompt aggregation. Unlike conventional prompt injection attacks, attacking TCPO targets the collaborative optimization loop in TCPO. This setting is more challenging because malicious instructions must survive aggregation, persist through subsequent benign prompt optimization, and evade server-side defenses. To expose this risk, we propose CPInj, a collaborative prompt injection attack that contaminates the aggregated global prompt with malicious instructions, degrades downstream task performance, resists purification by prompt optimization on benign clients, and evades advanced detection-based defenses on the server. We find that current defense methods are ineffective against CPInj. To mitigate this attack, we further propose a defense-oriented aggregation method, i.e., APAgg, which purifies malicious instructions and partially recovers TCPO utility. We conduct extensive experiments across three LLM families and five reasoning tasks in math, logic, and medicine. The results demonstrate that our proposed attack reveals a critical vulnerability in TCPO. Although we take a first step toward mitigation, the attack remains highly effective and far from fully resolved, calling for more robust defense for TCPO.