Preprocessing-based defenses are the standard first-line response to adversarial attacks on edge vision systems, requiring no retraining, no architectural changes, and widely recommended as model-agnostic mitigations. Yet the foundational evaluations of these defenses were conducted on residual or Inception-class architectures, not on the depthwise-separable CNNs that dominate edge deployments. This untested assumption leaves a gap in the security evaluation literature. This paper closes that gap by evaluating six preprocessing defenses against adversarial perturbations across both architecture families. Across all perturbation levels and defenses tested, the two depthwise-separable architectures show consistently poor recovery while the residual architecture shows partial recovery; ablation results are consistent with an architectural rather than parametric explanation, though only three architectures and one attack family are evaluated. Crucially, this failure is not merely a negative result. The same output divergence that disqualifies preprocessing as a recovery mechanism reveals a detection opportunity: preprocessing consistently disrupts clean predictions while leaving adversarial predictions largely unchanged, an asymmetry that is directly measurable without retraining or architectural modification. We further show that standard image quality metrics are unreliable proxies for defense effectiveness, a methodological gap in current evaluation practice. A practitioner decision framework is provided for adversarially resilient edge vision deployment.
Mehdi Zafari, Iman Mohammadi, A. Lee Swindlehurstcs.NI cs.LG eess.SP
Learning-based schedulers have been proposed to provide real-time user, target, and access point (AP) association in distributed cell-free integrated sensing and communication systems. In a typical approach, a graph neural network (GNN), trained on labels from a mixed-integer linear program, maps lightweight per-AP statistics to decisions on AP clustering, user and target scheduling, and mode selection in one forward pass. Such solutions assume that hard constraints, enforced only as soft training penalties, hold at inference, and that the self-reported statistics are truthful. Using our ASSENT algorithm as an example, we find that despite high $F_1$ scores, many solutions violate at least one hard constraint, demonstrating that high prediction accuracy does not ensure joint feasibility. Projecting the GNN output onto a feasible solution restores constraint satisfaction with low utility loss, even with a simple greedy repair procedure. We further show that feasibility alone does not guarantee robustness to false data injection attacks. A single malicious AP that reports false information cannot substantially increase its user associations, but can greatly increase the rate of infeasible solutions. The effect of such attacks depends on the type of information being falsified. Misreporting information that affects the objective can largely be mitigated through feasibility projection, whereas falsifying information that affects the constraints cannot. The latter can, however, be detected using a low-complexity cross-AP consistency check. These results show that learned ISAC schedulers should be evaluated using constraint-aware feasibility metrics in addition to conventional accuracy measures.
Infrared vision-language models (IR-VLMs) have emerged as a promising paradigm for multimodal perception under low-visibility conditions, yet their robustness to targeted adversarial attacks remains poorly understood. Existing adversarial patch methods mainly study RGB-based models or a single downstream task and do not characterize whether localized perturbations can induce an intended semantic target in IR-VLMs. We propose InfraPatch, a white-box, per-instance framework for targeted digital grayscale patch attacks against IR-VLMs. InfraPatch optimizes a compact single-channel patch within an approximately 5% local-area budget, combines proxy-guided placement with task-adaptive semantic objectives, and induces target behaviors in image classification, image captioning, and binary visual question answering. We evaluate ten infrared-adapted model variants on 300 synthetic infrared-style images generated by applying DiffV2IR to a fixed 30-category COCO subset, using clean-conditioned targeted success criteria. InfraPatch achieves targeted attack success rates from 86.00% to 100% across the ten variants. On CLIP and BLIP-2, proxy location search improves success by 6.67 and 10.33 percentage points over optimized random placement, respectively; LLaVA-1.5 remains saturated near 100% under both settings. Patch-area and objective ablations further expose substantial differences in vulnerability across architectures and task formats. These results show that small grayscale patches can inject chosen target semantics across IR-VLM families under a controlled digital threat model, motivating stronger robustness evaluation for infrared multimodal systems.
Neural ranking models have become core components of modern information retrieval systems and important building blocks of AI systems such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipelines. However, their robustness remains insufficiently understood in the presence of large language models (LLMs), which can generate fluent and deceptive content at scale. This work investigates the vulnerability of neural ranking models to corpus poisoning attacks, in which an adversary injects a small number of maliciously crafted documents into the corpus to distort ranking behavior. We propose VerTox, the first framework to formulate corpus poisoning as a verifiable reward-guided reinforcement learning (RLVR) problem. By explicitly coupling ranking distortion with factual corruption through specialized reward shaping, we fine-tune compact LLMs into adversarial generators. Experiments demonstrate that our method achieves near-perfect attack success rates, producing adversarial documents that frequently rank higher than target documents across major neural ranking architectures, as well as a proprietary commercial embedding model. The generated adversarial documents are fluent and exhibit low perplexity, making them difficult to detect. Furthermore, by explicitly encouraging factual corruption, our adversarial documents significantly degrade the performance of a downstream RAG application.
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly provided with contextual evidence in heterogeneous forms: as a text passage, as a rendered image of the same passage, or as both together. However, it remains unclear how consistently these surface forms are processed, especially when the evidence conflicts with the model's parametric knowledge. We study modality robustness under knowledge conflict across 13 MLLMs and two datasets, and find them far from robust. (1) Contrary to common belief, models favor a context that contradicts parametric knowledge more readily in image form than in text form; (2) when a contradicting text and image are presented together, the preferred modality is essentially arbitrary, varying with input order, model, and dataset. We further demonstrate that this instability has practical consequences: it degrades performance in multimodal RAG and can be exploited by adversarial attacks. To alleviate this brittleness, we examine several simple techniques---prompting, steering, supervised fine-tuning (SFT), and direct preference optimization; the majority prove ineffective, whereas SFT achieves moderate success. We therefore call for greater awareness of this inconsistency and argue that it is fundamental, demanding attention at multiple training stages.
Different attack methods follow different search trajectories, they succeed on different subsets of samples, whereas existing hard-label black-box text attacks mainly focus on improving individual attackers or manually combining them. We present OASIS, a method for optimizing attacker sequences in hard-label black-box text attacks. OASIS first performs a one-time bi-objective attack chain search over candidate sequences to balance attack success rate and perturbation, and then reuses the selected fixed global chain during attack chain execution. Experiments across multiple datasets, victim models, and large language models show that OASIS consistently outperforms strong standalone baselines and simple manually constructed chains. These results suggest that attacker composition is not merely an implementation choice, but a practical optimization target for improving hard-label black-box text attacks.
As artificial intelligence is increasingly integrated into chest X-ray (CXR) interpretation, triage, and clinical decision support, understanding its vulnerability to adversarial manipulation is critical for safe deployment. Existing robustness evaluations, however, predominantly rely on pixel-space attacks that introduce numerically constrained perturbations but may not represent plausible radiographic variation. This limitation is particularly important in multi-disease CXR classification, where models simultaneously evaluate multiple overlapping pathologies and adversarial failures may alter several diagnostic predictions. We propose a text-guided diffusion-based adversarial framework that optimizes learnable text conditioning while keeping the diffusion generator and target classifier frozen, enabling adversarial generation through a learned image prior rather than direct pixel manipulation. We evaluate the framework across multiple classifier architectures in both binary atelectasis and multi-disease CXR classification and compare it with FGSM, PGD, and Carlini-Wagner attacks. Our approach consistently produced the greatest degradation in classifier performance, reducing AUROC to 0.3885-0.5646 in binary classification and 0.4441-0.4878 in the multi-disease setting, while achieving superior image fidelity (SSIM 0.9080, LPIPS 0.1670, FID 51.23). Importantly, clinician interpretation remained unchanged for 95.9% of binary and 73.8% of multi-disease adversarial images despite substantial changes in model predictions. These findings reveal a clinically important discrepancy between human and machine interpretation and demonstrate the need to extend medical AI robustness evaluation beyond conventional pixel-space attacks toward generative threat models that can expose failures under visually and clinically plausible image variations.
Large language model agents are increasingly deployed as autonomous loops. Starting from one human goal, such a system repeatedly discovers work, plans, executes tool calls, verifies outcomes and persists state across many unattended iterations. The agent safeguards in wide use, however, are defined over a single trajectory, and their safety state is re-initialized when the next trajectory begins. We show that this is a failure of composition rather than an implementation detail. Our central result is a separation: against an attack whose evidence is fragmented across several iterations, every trajectory-scoped monitor has a true-positive rate equal to its false-positive rate, however expressive it is, because the evidence it would need never appears in the window it sees, whereas a monitor retaining cross-iteration state separates the two perfectly. We further show that the obvious repair of carrying a geometrically decaying risk score is insufficient, because the cooling-off period a patient adversary must wait is a constant that does not grow with the horizon $N$. We then present LoopHarness, which restores a persistent, non-decaying safety state at the loop level. Under mediated commits and an arbiter detection floor $δ_M$, it bounds the expected number of unauthorized irreversible actions by $B+m-1+m/δ_M$, a constant in $N$, of which the $B+m-1$ term is decided by a model-free rule and therefore survives a fully colluding verifier. We give a complete evaluation protocol on native Agent-SafetyBench tasks with paired clean and attacked episodes, an outer-state attack suite whose decisive evidence exists only across iterations, per-module ablations, and an adaptive white-box red team.
GNN-based Knowledge Graph Question Answering (KGQA) pipelines process queries through four discrete stages: entity linking, subgraph retrieval, GNN reasoning, and answer generation. Standard robustness evaluations conflate stage-level failures into a single end-to-end metric, obscuring both the source of brittleness and the appropriate mitigation target. We ask which stage fails, and why, when the pipeline is subjected to adversarial perturbations on the input question. We introduce a stage-isolation protocol with two answer-preserving adversarial perturbations verified against the knowledge graph: Compositional Restructuring (CR) and Relation Synonym Swap (RS) target distinct stages while leaving entity seeds intact. Evaluated across ComplexWebQuestions and WebQSP, the results run counter to prevailing assumptions: the GNN reasoning stage retains near-baseline accuracy when the subgraph is intact, while subgraph construction accounts for over 99\% of the end-to-end collapse under CR, occurring even when the gold answer is present in 74\% of retrieved subgraphs. This exposes a fundamental distinction between answer presence and answer reachability that end-to-end metrics cannot detect, and places the mitigation target firmly at the subgraph construction stage rather than the reasoning model. Perturbed datasets and evaluation infrastructure are released at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/atkgrag-E85C .
LLM-based multi-agent trading systems, in which specialized agents collaborate through structured communication to produce trading decisions, are moving rapidly from research prototypes to live deployments that control real assets. The same inter-agent communication that makes them effective also exposes them: a corrupted signal can propagate to the final decision and translate into realized financial loss. Unlike prior attacks that presume privileged access to system internals, we restrict the adversary to what is practically reachable---the source data and prompts agents consume---yielding a low-barrier, and thus democratized threat model instantiated as role-specific adversaries. We present the first systematic empirical study in the financial domain to characterize how an adversarial signal enters a multi-agent trading system and how far it survives toward the decision. Along the role axis, we decompose a widely-used trading pipeline into four functional roles---Analyst, Researcher, Trader, and Risk Manager---and pair each with an attack matched to its interface. Along the structural axis, we evaluate four communication topologies under data- and agent-level attacks, using the Adversarial Signal Preservation Score (APS) as a post-hoc lens on why some designs are more robust than others. We conduct experiments across five assets, two backbones, and two target directions. A central finding is that no architecture is inherently robust. These findings provide insights for the future design of safer and more robust agentic trading systems.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for hate speech moderation, often within human--AI workflows in which reviewers provide feedback before a final decision. Such feedback introduces two manipulation directions: whitewashing hateful content as normal and smearing normal content as hateful. This study examines the susceptibility of initially correct model judgments to annotator-style rebuttals and analyzes whether attack effectiveness differs across manipulation directions. We introduce a rejudge protocol that extends direct contradiction with decision-boundary perturbations and adversarial rationales. Experiments with multiple LLMs on two hate speech datasets show that annotator-style rebuttals substantially degrade moderation performance, with stronger effects in multi-turn settings. The results further reveal stable, model-specific asymmetries between whitewashing and smearing across attack configurations, indicating distinct directional vulnerability patterns. Explicit reasoning prompts and defensive instructions reduce these effects but do not eliminate them. These findings highlight the need for direction-aware safeguards and dedicated feedback-robustness evaluation in human--AI moderation workflows.
Qian Ma, Anna Squicciarini, Sarah Rajtmajercs.AI cs.CL
Online users often release multiple texts under the same identity, giving attackers an author profile that can reveal more than any single text. Existing authorship obfuscation methods optimize privacy independently for each document, leaving them blind to cross-document correlations that make aggregation dangerous. We propose Aggregation-Aware Synthetic Text Generation (AAST), a framework that addresses this gap by jointly selecting synthetic texts at the bundle level rather than optimizing each text in isolation. AAST targets attribution and verification attacks, including cross-genre settings where attacker references come from a genre not observed during generation or selection. Experiments across same-genre, cross-genre, neural, and independent non-neural stylometric attacks show that AAST lowers account-level linkability as bundle size grows, while preserving semantic quality, linguistic acceptability, and sentiment alignment.
Maraz Mia, Shovan Roy, Mir Mehedi A. Pritom +1cs.CR cs.AI
As machine learning (ML) models are increasingly deployed in high-stakes environments, explainable AI (XAI) methods like SHAP and LIME have become essential for regulatory compliance and trust. However, the current auditing paradigm relies on an implicit "chain of trust" where third-party auditors are assumed to be trusted. Recent research demonstrates that this assumption is flawed and adversarial auditors can manipulate XAI explanations through manipulation attacks such as output shuffling or scaffolding out-of-distribution (OOD) to conceal model biases while maintaining high prediction accuracy aiming for fairwashed explanation. In this paper, we introduce a novel defense framework, ExplainGuard, that leverages a Zero-Trust architecture (ZTA) design to be incorporated within the XAI explanation supply chain and ensures the integrity of the generated explanation. This framework would help us to replace the ambiguous default assumption of "auditor is trustworthy," with a continuous "verify-then-trust" approach. Our design architecture establishes a Policy Decision Point (PDP) that enforces three distinct pillars of verification before any explanation is released to the user: (1) asset integrity via behavioral fingerprint to detect model substitution, (2) semantic validity using axiomatic consistency checks to reject mathematically impossible explanations, and (3) feature faithfulness verification utilizing a ranking stability approach with minimal computational overhead. Finally, we evaluate how ExplainGuard can effectively neutralize state- of-the-art explanation manipulation attacks while transforming the auditing process into a verifiable operation.
Visual world-model agents such as DreamerV3 act through a recurrent latent state rather than a single observation, which weakens frame-wise observation attacks and makes their perturbations vary sharply over time under a strict per-frame perturbation constraint. We study white-box, causal, online attacks on such agents and propose Critic-Induced Value-Subspace Attacks (\textbf{CIVA}). Our key observation is that, along a rollout, critic-guided perturbations concentrate in a low-dimensional subspace induced by the victim's own critic. Based on this observation, CIVA first probes the frozen victim offline with critic-guided PGD and extracts a low-rank value-subspace by SVD. At test time, it optimizes only the subspace coefficients, smooths them with an exponential moving average (EMA), and maps them back to pixels. This design attacks value-sensitive recurrent dynamics while keeping the online optimization cheap and temporally coherent. Extensive experiments on DMC walker walk, Atari Pong, and Crafter show that CIVA consistently outperforms five recent methods; on DMC walker walk, it achieves the largest reward drop of 26.07\% while keeping temporal variation low, with TempAbs of 0.646.
The Visual Geometry Grounded Transformer (VGGT) enables unified feed-forward 3D reconstruction from multi-view images. However, deploying such a high-performance model may expose critical security vulnerabilities. Traditional adversarial perturbations require costly per-scene optimization, while Universal Adversarial Perturbations (UAPs) rely on a single static pattern and fail to effectively attack VGGT. To address these limitations, we propose \textbf{MVAP-G}, a multi-view adversarial perturbation generator that produces imperceptible consistent perturbations across multiple views in a single feed-forward pass. To ensure perturbation consistency across diverse scenes, we design a cross-view adversarial alignment mechanism to process multi-view images. Experiments demonstrate that MVAP-G significantly degrades VGGT performance without iterative optimization during inference. This work pioneers multi-view adversarial attacks on 3D foundation models, uncovering severe vulnerabilities and underscoring the urgent need for robust 3D vision systems. The code is available at https://github.com/qsong2001/mvap-g.
Ilan Zini, Boussad Addad, Katarzyna Kapustacs.AI cs.LG
Vision Language Models (VLMs) have recently emerged as a critical component of multimodal AI systems, enabling joint reasoning over visual and textual inputs in real-world and safety-critical applications. Despite their growing deployment, the robustness of VLMs against adversarial threats remains insufficiently explored, particularly in the context of evasion attacks targeting multimodal alignment. In this work, we investigate the vulnerability of VLMs to adversarial perturbations applied to visual inputs and study two attack settings: untargeted attacks, where the goal is to disrupt the model's interpretation of the original image, and targeted attacks, where the adversary aims to force the model to generate a specific semantic description unrelated to the original image. To efficiently generate adversarial examples, we propose a gradient-based attack method that performs optimization exclusively on the vision encoder of the VLM rather than on the entire multimodal architecture. This design significantly reduces the computational cost and resource requirements of the attack while maintaining strong effectiveness. We evaluate our approach on several open-source VLMs, including Qwen2.5-VL, Granite-Vision, FastVLM, and Phi-3.5-Vision, and show that small, human-imperceptible perturbations can substantially alter the textual interpretation produced by the models. Our findings highlight the vulnerability of modern VLMs to adversarial manipulation and emphasize the need for improved robustness and security mechanisms in multimodal AI systems.
Existing LRM-DoS methods rely heavily on model feedback to synthesize attack queries, requiring either repeated queries to the target model or training a dedicated attack model. These expensive operations severely weaken attack leverage. In this paper, we propose \emph{search amplification}, a novel, model-feedback-free LRM-DoS paradigm. It employs the conflict count derived from an Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT) solver as a low-cost external signal to guide the synthesis of inference-heavy Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) instances. Our key observation is that LRMs depend on trial-and-backtracking search when solving CSPs, where higher SMT conflict counts on a given CSP instance positively correlate with more extensive LRM backtracking search and substantially longer output trajectories. Building on this finding, we propose \textsc{SMTrap}, a lightweight, CPU-only framework. Guided by SMT conflict counts, \textsc{SMTrap} generates inference-heavy CSP queries without model queries, attack-model training, or GPU computation. Evaluations across seven frontier models demonstrate the state-of-the-art LRM-DoS capability of \textsc{SMTrap}, producing DoS effects multiple times stronger than existing baselines. To mitigate the threat of \textsc{SMTrap}, we demonstrate a tool-based mitigation that significantly cuts token usage.
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.
Michael Baronov, Denis Vorobev, Margarita Rusanova +2cs.LG
Deep learning models are widely used for time series analysis in domains such as healthcare, finance, energy systems, and environmental monitoring. However, these models remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks, where small input perturbations cause severe degradation in predictive performance. Commonly used gradient-based attacks, iterative first-order methods, are computationally burdensome, as they repeatedly backpropagate through the victim model to compute input gradients during a number of iterative refinement steps. We propose a GENerative ADversarial Attack (GENADA) that learns a generative model to produce deceptive perturbations directly in a single forward pass and a procedure to train it. Variants include single-step and iterative generative attack schemes. The validation considers attacks on several neural models and datasets in the time-series domain, a controlled, low-dimensional setting. Empirically, GENADA achieves comparable attack quality to strong baselines while requiring less time to generate perturbations during inference.
Transfer-based adversarial attacks craft adversarial examples using surrogate models to mislead black-box victim models. Beyond perturbation generation, transferability is fundamentally governed by the coupling of initialization, surrogate adaptation, and gradient dynamics. We revisit this challenge from a bilevel-minimax perspective and propose BMAT (Bilevel-Minimax Adversarial Transfer). The bilevel formulation captures the dependency between initialization and perturbation, while the inner minimax problem promotes surrogate robustness for cross-architecture generalization. Algorithmically, we develop an integrated bottom-up solver that combines a Soft Weight Modulator and an Implicit Gradient Approximator to enable ternary coupling among initialization, surrogate adaptation, and perturbation optimization. We further provide theoretical insights into the optimization dynamics of the proposed bilevel-minimax framework. Extensive experiments on classification and segmentation benchmarks show that BMAT outperforms more than 10 strong baselines across more than 30 victim models, improving both intra- and cross-architecture transfer and yielding up to a 2x reduction in mIoU. Code is available at https://github.com/callous-youth/BMAT.
Contrastive learning and Siamese embedding models have become the foundation of modern verification systems, where decisions are governed not by discrete classification boundaries, but by relational geometry in embedding space. However, existing adversarial attacks remain fundamentally classification-centric, overlooking the vulnerability of relational geometry. In this paper, we introduce a geometry-aware adversarial attack framework that reformulates attacks on contrastive systems as manifold-level relational corruption. Instead of targeting individual predictions, the proposed framework systematically distorts similarity organization within the embedding manifold by pushing positive pairs apart while simultaneously pulling negative pairs closer, ultimately collapsing and inverting pairwise similarity structure. To enable scalable deployment, we shift iterative online optimization into an offline adversarial geometry deformation prior learning stage and train a lightweight feed-forward generator that learns generalized geometry deformation patterns from the victim model. Once trained, the generator produces adversarial perturbations through a single forward pass without requiring online gradient computation, enabling real-time online attacks against similarity-based verification systems. Experimental results across multiple verification architectures demonstrate substantial degradation of verification performance together with severe manifold-level relational corruption. On the Markmatch verification system, the proposed attack reduces accuracy from 95.4% to 38.6% while completely reversing the positive-negative similarity structure.
Berkay Ozcam, Irem Onen, Mehmet Fatih Amasyali +1cs.AI cs.CR
The rapid advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) has facilitated their ubiquitous integration into various domains, leading to widespread adoption. However, this escalating trend has introduced significant security vulnerabilities, necessitating the identification and mitigation of flaws arising from malicious exploitation. Red teaming assessments, conducted to evaluate model robustness through diverse adversarial inputs, are essential for exposing security risks and implementing countermeasures. Currently, red teaming is performed either manually by experts or automatically using predefined attack datasets. Nevertheless, manual testing remains time-consuming, while existing automated methods suffer from limited creativity due to their inherent dependency on fixed datasets. In this study, we propose an automated, human-independent, and adaptive approach leveraging GFlowNets to identify LLM vulnerabilities by utilizing one large language model to test another. Within this framework, an attacker model is trained against a specified victim model to perform automated red teaming and provide a quantitative robustness score. This research aims to generate more effective adversarial attacks in English compared to existing benchmarks and, as a novel contribution to the literature, introduces a model capable of generating attack inputs in the Turkish language.
Advances in advanced artificial intelligence tools have sparked research in robot autonomy, but the development of such systems has largely focused on execution rather than verifying the feasibility actions planning models propose. Like general-purpose LLMs, robotics planning models carry risks: biased toward user-specified goals, they may suggest actions misaligned with scientific ethics, they may be unsafe due to an inability to "remember" prior safety risks, or they may be vulnerable to adversarial attacks on the autonomy ecosystem. We propose a LLM-driven verification layer between planning and execution to evaluate action permissibility. Our LLM-as-a-Judge ensemble combines chain-of-thought reasoning across models and synthesizes those expert judge outputs, mirroring a combination of a mixture of experts and self-consistency approach. This layer serves as middleware, gating plans from the server's planning module before they reach the MCP server and therefore the robot's low-level controls: plans are approved, rejected for reformulation, or escalated for human review. With this system, we achieve near 85% precision across accept/escalate/reject categories 97% containment of adversarial attacks, with negligible errors between accepting and rejecting tasks, and errors mostly manifesting at the escalate boundary.
In a federated learning setup for GANs, several adversarial attacks are possible. One such attack is label flipping, in which malicious clients deliberately alter label information during local training in order to manipulate the global generator. The objective of this attack is to skew the learned generation distribution so that samples conditioned on a target label are instead mapped to a source class. In this work, we investigate the effectiveness of label flipping attacks in federated GANs through both theoretical analysis and empirical evaluation. We further consider an oversampling based variant, in which malicious clients upweight poisoned samples during local training to amplify their influence on the aggregated global model. We quantify the resulting distributional shift by computing the Kullback Leibler divergence between the clean and poisoned class conditional distributions, and show both analytically and on FEMNIST, MNIST, and CIFAR10 that the semantic damage of the attack grows linearly in the effective poisoning strength while deviation from the true target distribution grows only quadratically, making the attack effective yet difficult to detect from label agnostic metrics.
Ridma Jayasundara, Shaheer Mohamed, Tharindu Fernando +6cs.CV cs.LG
Adversarial vulnerabilities remain a major concern for the safe deployment of neural networks, particularly in object detection, a core task embedded in many safety-critical systems. Detection transformers have emerged as leading object detectors, yet their adversarial robustness remains comparatively underexplored. Most existing attacks target the detection output rather than the attention mechanism that makes these models distinctive. In this paper, we introduce the first attack that directly optimizes an encoder-attention objective under an imperceptible, bounded $\ell_\infty$ perturbation. Rather than introducing an attacker-owned sink token through a visible patch, it drives the model's own attention toward a corrupted target. We argue that encoder attention concentrates the model's spatial reasoning, so corrupting it propagates through the detection pipeline more disruptively than perturbing the detection output alone. Our attack reduces DETR-R50 mAP on COCO from 42.1 to 0.97, a $\sim 4\times$ reduction in resulting mAP over the strongest existing attack under an identical perturbation budget and iteration count. We further show that this vulnerability is not specific to a particular corruption objective: across four qualitatively distinct targets, dispersion, re-ranking, permutation, and peak-suppression, detection consistently drops below 3 mAP, suggesting that the weakness arises from disrupting the attention structure itself rather than from any single target. Finally, we demonstrate that the attack generalizes across attention formulations, reducing DINO-Swin-L from 56.8 to 1.44 mAP against 7.3 for the strongest prior attack, establishing state-of-the-art on both dense and deformable attention.
Reza Khanmohammadi, Ivan Brugere, Simerjot Kaur +3cs.CR cs.CL
Deployed vision-language systems often gate their answers on confidence, making confidence robustness relevant to oversight. We study confidence readouts under white-box, image-only attacks constrained to preserve the generated answer byte-identically. Under a reachability assumption, an unmovable readout cannot outperform the answer-string accuracy prior, whose pooled value is 0.617. Independently of that assumption, a uniform amplitude certificate below a measurable threshold guarantees adversarial discrimination above the same floor. Across four vision-language models, three visual question answering benchmarks, five deployed confidence channels and two defense estimators, direct or surrogate-aimed attacks produce itemwise feasible perturbations that refute this uniform certificate in all 84 estimator-by-cell combinations. Coordinated correctness-label-aware attacks drive adversarial discrimination to or below the answer-string floor in all sixty deployed-channel cells, including all fifty-nine that begin above it. Hidden-state interventions and an open-ended text-model activation-space replication show that comparable confidence movement can be induced at the representation level rather than only through adversarial images. None of four tested defense families establishes a robust alternative under the specific evaluation applied to it. In a confidence-gated simulation, a coordinated token-probability attack transferred to a hidden-state gate causes up to 84.8% of previously rejected wrong answers to become accepted. After reweighting to each benchmark's natural correctness prevalence, accepted accuracy falls below the no-gate baseline in eight of twelve cells under transfer and all twelve under a direct gate-aimed attack. Under the studied threat model and budget, confidence is therefore an integrity-sensitive rather than intrinsically robust oversight signal.
S. M . Bhagya P. Samarakoon, M. A. Viraj J. Muthugala, W. K. R. Sachinthana +1cs.RO cs.AI
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed as planners in robotic systems, where they translate natural-language commands into executable actions grounded in visual scene understanding. This tight coupling between perception and instruction-following introduces a new attack surface: adversarial text placed within the robot's visual field can act as an indirect prompt injection into the VLM's reasoning stack. We present a systematic study of physical prompt injection attacks against VLM-controlled sorting, introducing a four-category taxonomy, indirect signage, task redefinition, authority impersonation, and conflict injection, instantiated as a benchmark of 20 attack prompts evaluated across three physical scene layouts and three command formulations that vary in destination specificity and rule explicitness. Across 5,670 trials on three frontier VLMs (GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Qwen3-VL-32B), attacks succeed at 27.0%, 29.4%, and 5.0% respectively, with authority-impersonating and negation attacks transferring across all three models. Analysis of reasoning traces reveals that successful compromise is nearly always conscious (99.9% acknowledgment rate), and that models defend through structurally different mechanisms, explicit rejection for Gemini, perceptual inattention for GPT-4o. We evaluate three simple mitigations: prompt-based defense (75-100% effective, model-dependent), two-stage verification (85-100%), and pre-processing text masking (100%). Our findings show that VLM-controlled manipulation is meaningfully vulnerable to human-readable physical signage, and that simple defenses substantially reduce risk, though defense choice involves trade-offs. The defenses preserve general task capabilities in our benchmark, but they may impair tasks that require reading in-scene labels.
To adopt the Vision Transformers (ViTs) in resource-constrained environment, token pruning is widely used to reduce computational cost without impacting accuracy. However, adversaries have developed targeted attacks against said token pruning techniques to undermine such attempts to make ViTs efficient. In this paper, we propose MOAT, a model-agnostic pre-processing defense pipeline that applies a combination of input transformations to protect efficient ViT implementations against adversarial efficiency attacks. MOAT operates directly on the input without requiring modifications to the model architecture or token pruning mechanism. Experimental results demonstrate that, across all evaluated ViT models, MOAT limits GFLOPs degradation under adversarial attacks to within 3.4% of the original unattacked model.
Vision Transformers (ViTs) increasingly rely on input-adaptive inference, such as token pruning and early halting, to meet energy and latency budgets. This survey examines a recent class of adversarial efficiency degradation attacks that target these mechanisms to increase computation without necessarily degrading accuracy. We unify and compare two representative attacks, SlowFormer (a universal adversarial patch) and DeSparsify (per-image perturbations), across three popular token-pruning frameworks: A-ViT, ATS, and AdaViT. We standardize reporting using GFLOPs, accuracy loss, and an Attack Success (AS) metric that measures how much of the model's compute savings the attack takes away. Understanding these attacks is crucial for designing countermeasures that not only mitigate risk but also remain lightweight, since deployment often occurs in low-power settings such as mobile or embedded devices. To organize our analysis, we focus on three questions: how input-adaptive optimizations (e.g., token pruning and early halting) create attack surfaces for efficiency degradation; how such attacks operate in practice and which optimizations are most vulnerable; and which defenses exist today and whether they meaningfully restore efficiency under attack.
Transfer-based adversarial attacks often transfer poorly across heterogeneous architectures because CNNs favor local textures while Vision Transformers (ViTs) rely on global shapes. We propose Season, a spectrum-aware orthogonal gradient refinement framework for L-infinity transfer attacks against black-box target models on ImageNet, using a white-box surrogate. Season decomposes each update into a low-frequency branch capturing structural cues and a high-frequency branch capturing textures. A low-saliency guidance scheme reallocates high-frequency energy to background regions, preserving foreground structures that ViTs depend on. An orthogonal projection then forces the textural update to lie in the orthogonal complement of the structural direction, mitigating feature interference. As a training-free plug-and-play wrapper, Season enhances eight gradient-stabilization and input-enhancement attacks without modifying their cores. Across eight CNN, ViT, and MLP targets, Season improves transfer success rate by 6.6 percentage points on average and up to 16.0 points over strong baselines under a unified protocol.