Attention Tracker: Detecting Prompt Injection Attacks in LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.00348v1
• Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 04:05:59 GMT
• Title: Attention Tracker: Detecting Prompt Injection Attacks in LLMs
• Authors: Kuo-Han Hung, Ching-Yun Ko, Ambrish Rawat, I-Hsin Chung, Winston H. Hsu, Pin-Yu Chen,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various domains but remain vulnerable to prompt injection attacks. We introduce the concept of the distraction effect, where specific attention heads shift focus from the original instruction to the injected instruction. We propose Attention Tracker, a training-free detection method that tracks attention patterns on instruction to detect prompt injection attacks.
• Score: 62.247841717696765
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized various domains but remain vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, where malicious inputs manipulate the model into ignoring original instructions and executing designated action. In this paper, we investigate the underlying mechanisms of these attacks by analyzing the attention patterns within LLMs. We introduce the concept of the distraction effect, where specific attention heads, termed important heads, shift focus from the original instruction to the injected instruction. Building on this discovery, we propose Attention Tracker, a training-free detection method that tracks attention patterns on instruction to detect prompt injection attacks without the need for additional LLM inference. Our method generalizes effectively across diverse models, datasets, and attack types, showing an AUROC improvement of up to 10.0% over existing methods, and performs well even on small LLMs. We demonstrate the robustness of our approach through extensive evaluations and provide insights into safeguarding LLM-integrated systems from prompt injection vulnerabilities.

Related papers

• Defense Against Prompt Injection Attack by Leveraging Attack Techniques [66.65466992544728]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance across various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. As LLMs continue to evolve, new vulnerabilities, especially prompt injection attacks arise. Recent attack methods leverage LLMs' instruction-following abilities and their inabilities to distinguish instructions injected in the data content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-01T09:14:21Z)
• Fine-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs): Improved Prompt Injection Attacks Detection [6.269725911814401]
  Large language models (LLMs) are becoming a popular tool as they have significantly advanced in their capability to tackle a wide range of language-based tasks. However, LLMs applications are highly vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, which poses a critical problem. This project explores the security vulnerabilities in relation to prompt injection attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T00:36:21Z)
• Securing Large Language Models: Addressing Bias, Misinformation, and Prompt Attacks [12.893445918647842]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) demonstrate impressive capabilities across various fields, yet their increasing use raises critical security concerns. This article reviews recent literature addressing key issues in LLM security, with a focus on accuracy, bias, content detection, and vulnerability to attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-12T14:42:08Z)
• Detecting and Understanding Vulnerabilities in Language Models via Mechanistic Interpretability [44.99833362998488]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown impressive performance across a wide range of tasks. LLMs in particular are known to be vulnerable to adversarial attacks, where an imperceptible change to the input can mislead the output of the model. We propose a method, based on Mechanistic Interpretability (MI) techniques, to guide this process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T09:55:34Z)
• AutoDetect: Towards a Unified Framework for Automated Weakness Detection in Large Language Models [95.09157454599605]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are becoming increasingly powerful, but they still exhibit significant but subtle weaknesses. Traditional benchmarking approaches cannot thoroughly pinpoint specific model deficiencies. We introduce a unified framework, AutoDetect, to automatically expose weaknesses in LLMs across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:16:45Z)
• Defending Large Language Models Against Attacks With Residual Stream Activation Analysis [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to adversarial threats. This paper presents an innovative defensive strategy, given white box access to an LLM. We apply a novel methodology for analyzing distinctive activation patterns in the residual streams for attack prompt classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T13:06:33Z)
• Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models [82.98081731588717]
  Integration of large language models with external content exposes applications to indirect prompt injection attacks. We introduce the first benchmark for indirect prompt injection attacks, named BIPIA, to evaluate the risk of such attacks. We develop two black-box methods based on prompt learning and a white-box defense method based on fine-tuning with adversarial training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T01:08:39Z)
• Defending Pre-trained Language Models as Few-shot Learners against Backdoor Attacks [72.03945355787776]
  We advocate MDP, a lightweight, pluggable, and effective defense for PLMs as few-shot learners. We show analytically that MDP creates an interesting dilemma for the attacker to choose between attack effectiveness and detection evasiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-23T04:41:55Z)
• Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection [70.28425745910711]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional proficiency in instruction-following. This capability brings with it the risk of prompt injection attacks. We evaluate the robustness of instruction-following LLMs against such attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-17T06:21:50Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.