PISanitizer: Preventing Prompt Injection to Long-Context LLMs via Prompt Sanitization

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10720v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 18:56:20 GMT
• Title: PISanitizer: Preventing Prompt Injection to Long-Context LLMs via Prompt Sanitization
• Authors: Runpeng Geng, Yanting Wang, Chenlong Yin, Minhao Cheng, Ying Chen, Jinyuan Jia,
• Abstract summary: Long context LLMs are vulnerable to prompt injection.<n> PISanitizer sanitizes potential injected tokens before letting a backend LLM generate a response.<n> PISanitizer can successfully prevent prompt injection, maintain utility, outperform existing defenses, is efficient, and is robust to optimization-based and strong adaptive attacks.
• Score: 34.516158143781134
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Long context LLMs are vulnerable to prompt injection, where an attacker can inject an instruction in a long context to induce an LLM to generate an attacker-desired output. Existing prompt injection defenses are designed for short contexts. When extended to long-context scenarios, they have limited effectiveness. The reason is that an injected instruction constitutes only a very small portion of a long context, making the defense very challenging. In this work, we propose PISanitizer, which first pinpoints and sanitizes potential injected tokens (if any) in a context before letting a backend LLM generate a response, thereby eliminating the influence of the injected instruction. To sanitize injected tokens, PISanitizer builds on two observations: (1) prompt injection attacks essentially craft an instruction that compels an LLM to follow it, and (2) LLMs intrinsically leverage the attention mechanism to focus on crucial input tokens for output generation. Guided by these two observations, we first intentionally let an LLM follow arbitrary instructions in a context and then sanitize tokens receiving high attention that drive the instruction-following behavior of the LLM. By design, PISanitizer presents a dilemma for an attacker: the more effectively an injected instruction compels an LLM to follow it, the more likely it is to be sanitized by PISanitizer. Our extensive evaluation shows that PISanitizer can successfully prevent prompt injection, maintain utility, outperform existing defenses, is efficient, and is robust to optimization-based and strong adaptive attacks. The code is available at https://github.com/sleeepeer/PISanitizer.

Related papers

• Know Thy Enemy: Securing LLMs Against Prompt Injection via Diverse Data Synthesis and Instruction-Level Chain-of-Thought Learning [31.790490397086856]
  Large language model (LLM)-integrated applications have become increasingly prevalent, yet face critical security vulnerabilities from prompt injection (PI) attacks.<n>We propose InstruCoT, a model enhancement method for PI defense that synthesizes diverse training data and employs instruction-level chain-of-thought fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T07:25:27Z)
• PIShield: Detecting Prompt Injection Attacks via Intrinsic LLM Features [33.95073302161128]
  Existing prompt injection detection methods often have sub-optimal performance and/or high computational overhead.<n>We propose PIShield, a detection method that is both effective and efficient.<n>We show that PIShield is both highly effective and efficient, substantially outperforming existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-15T18:34:49Z)
• Revisiting Backdoor Attacks on LLMs: A Stealthy and Practical Poisoning Framework via Harmless Inputs [54.90315421117162]
  We propose a novel poisoning method via completely harmless data.<n>Inspired by the causal reasoning in auto-regressive LLMs, we aim to establish robust associations between triggers and an affirmative response prefix.<n>We observe an interesting resistance phenomenon where the LLM initially appears to agree but subsequently refuses to answer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T08:13:59Z)
• Robustness via Referencing: Defending against Prompt Injection Attacks by Referencing the Executed Instruction [68.6543680065379]
  Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks.<n>We propose a novel defense method that leverages, rather than suppresses, the instruction-following abilities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-29T07:13:53Z)
• Denial-of-Service Poisoning Attacks against Large Language Models [64.77355353440691]
  LLMs are vulnerable to denial-of-service (DoS) attacks, where spelling errors or non-semantic prompts trigger endless outputs without generating an [EOS] token. We propose poisoning-based DoS attacks for LLMs, demonstrating that injecting a single poisoned sample designed for DoS purposes can break the output length limit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T17:39:31Z)
• SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimization [52.48001255555192]
  Adversarial prompts can be injected into external data sources to override the system's intended instruction and execute a malicious instruction.<n>We propose a new defense called SecAlign based on the technique of preference optimization.<n>Our method reduces the success rates of various prompt injections to 10%, even against attacks much more sophisticated than ones seen during training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T19:34:35Z)
• Human-Interpretable Adversarial Prompt Attack on Large Language Models with Situational Context [49.13497493053742]
  This research explores converting a nonsensical suffix attack into a sensible prompt via a situation-driven contextual re-writing. We combine an independent, meaningful adversarial insertion and situations derived from movies to check if this can trick an LLM. Our approach demonstrates that a successful situation-driven attack can be executed on both open-source and proprietary LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-19T19:47:26Z)
• Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlighting [11.127479817618692]
  In common applications, multiple inputs can be processed by concatenating them together into a single stream of text. Indirect prompt injection attacks take advantage of this vulnerability by embedding adversarial instructions into untrusted data being processed alongside user commands. We introduce spotlighting, a family of prompt engineering techniques that can be used to improve LLMs' ability to distinguish among multiple sources of input.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-20T15:26:23Z)
• Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models [79.0183835295533]
  We introduce the first benchmark for indirect prompt injection attacks, named BIPIA, to assess the risk of such vulnerabilities.<n>Our analysis identifies two key factors contributing to their success: LLMs' inability to distinguish between informational context and actionable instructions, and their lack of awareness in avoiding the execution of instructions within external content.<n>We propose two novel defense mechanisms-boundary awareness and explicit reminder-to address these vulnerabilities in both black-box and white-box settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T01:08:39Z)
• 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.