Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Life-Cycle Routing Vulnerabilities of LLM Router

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 2503.08704 v1 pith:FVQS5SJ4 submitted 2025-03-09 cs.CR cs.AI

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

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in natural language processing, yet their performance and computational costs vary significantly. LLM routers play a crucial role in dynamically balancing these trade-offs. While previous studies have primarily focused on routing efficiency, security vulnerabilities throughout the entire LLM router life cycle, from training to inference, remain largely unexplored. In this paper, we present a comprehensive investigation into the life-cycle routing vulnerabilities of LLM routers. We evaluate both white-box and black-box adversarial robustness, as well as backdoor robustness, across several representative routing models under extensive experimental settings. Our experiments uncover several key findings: 1) Mainstream DNN-based routers tend to exhibit the weakest adversarial and backdoor robustness, largely due to their strong feature extraction capabilities that amplify vulnerabilities during both training and inference; 2) Training-free routers demonstrate the strongest robustness across different attack types, benefiting from the absence of learnable parameters that can be manipulated. These findings highlight critical security risks spanning the entire life cycle of LLM routers and provide insights for developing more robust models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Where Is the Cost of Third-Party API Routers in Agentic Software Development?

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.5 of 10

    Router-side response tampering yields 0% defense success on Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and OpenCode; whitelist and LLM review only partially restore control.

  2. Securing Agentic AI: From Per-Action Checks to Trajectory Assurance

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A vision paper organizing agentic AI security into eleven research directions, with the thesis that safety requires verifiable trajectory-level behavioral guarantees, not per-action checks.

Pith tools