Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

FATH: Authentication-based Test-time Defense against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2410.21492 v2 pith:U5DIXMVV submitted 2024-10-28 cs.CR cs.CL

classification cs.CRcs.CL
keywords attacksinstructionsdefensellmsmethodstest-timeauthenticationexternal
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have been widely deployed as the backbone with additional tools and text information for real-world applications. However, integrating external information into LLM-integrated applications raises significant security concerns. Among these, prompt injection attacks are particularly threatening, where malicious instructions injected in the external text information can exploit LLMs to generate answers as the attackers desire. While both training-time and test-time defense methods have been developed to mitigate such attacks, the unaffordable training costs associated with training-time methods and the limited effectiveness of existing test-time methods make them impractical. This paper introduces a novel test-time defense strategy, named Formatting AuThentication with Hash-based tags (FATH). Unlike existing approaches that prevent LLMs from answering additional instructions in external text, our method implements an authentication system, requiring LLMs to answer all received instructions with a security policy and selectively filter out responses to user instructions as the final output. To achieve this, we utilize hash-based authentication tags to label each response, facilitating accurate identification of responses according to the user's instructions and improving the robustness against adaptive attacks. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate that our defense method can effectively defend against indirect prompt injection attacks, achieving state-of-the-art performance under Llama3 and GPT3.5 models across various attack methods. Our code is released at: https://github.com/Jayfeather1024/FATH

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. From Neural Intent to Cryptographic Authorization: Securing AI-Driven Enterprise Workflows

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    NCS gates every privileged AI-agent tool call behind an offline-signed, hash-chained instruction stream, cutting injected-parameter attacks to zero by construction.

  2. Invisible Prompts, Visible Threats: Malicious Font Injection in External Resources for Large Language Models

    cs.CR 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Maliciously crafted fonts can hide adversarial prompts from human eyes while LLMs read and obey them, enabling content manipulation and data exfiltration via MCP tools.

  3. When Your Reviewer is an LLM: Biases, Divergence, and Prompt Injection Risks in Peer Review

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    GPT-5-mini gives weaker papers systematically higher scores than human reviewers, and hidden field-specific prompts in PDFs can force it to assign perfect scores or suppress weaknesses.

  4. Prompt-in-Content Attacks: Exploiting Uploaded Inputs to Hijack LLM Behavior

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Embedding a short 'system instruction' in a .docx file causes several commercial LLMs to refuse, substitute, redirect, or bias their output during summarization tasks.

Pith tools