Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 cited by

Adversarial Attacks on Robotic Vision Language Action Models

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 2506.03350 v1 pith:WZVXDZLP submitted 2025-06-03 cs.RO cs.AI

classification cs.ROcs.AI
keywords attacksvlasadversarialmodelsactioncontroljailbreakinglanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The emergence of vision-language-action models (VLAs) for end-to-end control is reshaping the field of robotics by enabling the fusion of multimodal sensory inputs at the billion-parameter scale. The capabilities of VLAs stem primarily from their architectures, which are often based on frontier large language models (LLMs). However, LLMs are known to be susceptible to adversarial misuse, and given the significant physical risks inherent to robotics, questions remain regarding the extent to which VLAs inherit these vulnerabilities. Motivated by these concerns, in this work we initiate the study of adversarial attacks on VLA-controlled robots. Our main algorithmic contribution is the adaptation and application of LLM jailbreaking attacks to obtain complete control authority over VLAs. We find that textual attacks, which are applied once at the beginning of a rollout, facilitate full reachability of the action space of commonly used VLAs and often persist over longer horizons. This differs significantly from LLM jailbreaking literature, as attacks in the real world do not have to be semantically linked to notions of harm. We make all code available at https://github.com/eliotjones1/robogcg .

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

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

  1. TRAP: Hijacking VLA CoT-Reasoning via Adversarial Patches

    cs.CR 2026-03 conditional novelty 7.5 of 10

    Physical adversarial patches can steer CoT-reasoning VLAs into attacker-specified manipulation behaviors without changing the user’s instruction.

  2. DRIFT: Derailing Denoising Trajectories of Flow-Matching VLAs with Adversarial Patch Attack

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A test-time universal patch that perturbs only the first denoising step of a frozen flow-matching VLA derails nearly all LIBERO tasks, outperforming wider-step and action-space attacks.

  3. Safety in Embodied AI: A Survey of Risks, Attacks, and Defenses

    cs.CR 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The survey organizes over 400 papers on embodied AI safety into a multi-level taxonomy and flags overlooked issues such as fragile multimodal fusion and unstable planning under jailbreaks.

  4. High-Entropy Tokens as Multimodal Failure Points in Vision-Language Models

    cs.CV 2025-12 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    High-entropy tokens act as concentrated multimodal failure points in VLMs, enabling sparse Entropy-Guided Attacks that achieve 93-95% success and 30-38% harmful rates with cross-model transfer.

  5. Security of World-Model-Based Embodied AI: A Lifecycle of Threats, Defenses, and Evaluation

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    World-model-based embodied AI creates a predictive security boundary where attacks on data, sensors, imagination, ranking, and feedback can turn into unsafe physical action and false safety certificates.

  6. VLAGuard: A Framework for Evaluating and Mitigating Physical Attention Hijacking in Vision-Language-Action Robots within Wireless Sensor Networks

    cs.RO 2026-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    APFT fine-tuning reduces OpenVLA failure under attention-hijacking patches from 100% to 25.9% in simulation and raises real-world success from 23.0% to 67.4%.

  7. Embodied AI: Emerging Risks and Opportunities for Policy Action

    cs.CY 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A policy analysis arguing that embodied AI risks are real, under-covered by current US/EU/UK frameworks, and best handled through certification, benchmarks, clarified liability, and economic adaptation.

Pith tools