Abstract:Simulated environments are a key piece in the success of Reinforcement Learning (RL), allowing practitioners and researchers to train decision making agents without running expensive experiments on real hardware. Simulators remain a security blind spot, however, enabling adversarial developers to alter the dynamics of their released simulators for malicious purposes. Therefore, in this work we highlight a novel threat, demonstrating how simulator dynamics can be exploited to stealthily implant action-level backdoors into RL agents. The backdoor then allows an adversary to reliably activate targeted actions in an agent upon observing a predefined ``trigger'', leading to potentially dangerous consequences. Traditional backdoor attacks are limited in their strong threat models, assuming the adversary has near full control over an agent's training pipeline, enabling them to both alter and observe agent's rewards. As these assumptions are infeasible to implement within a simulator, we propose a new attack ``Daze'' which is able to reliably and stealthily implant backdoors into RL agents trained for real world tasks without altering or even observing their rewards. We provide formal proof of Daze's effectiveness in guaranteeing attack success across general RL tasks along with extensive empirical evaluations on both discrete and continuous action space domains. We additionally provide the first example of RL backdoor attacks transferring to real, robotic hardware. These developments motivate further research into securing all components of the RL training pipeline to prevent malicious attacks.
Abstract:LLM-based vulnerability detectors are increasingly deployed in security-critical code review, yet their resilience to evasion under behavior-preserving edits remains poorly understood. We evaluate detection-time integrity under a semantics-preserving threat model by instantiating diverse behavior-preserving code transformations on a unified C/C++ benchmark (N=5000), and introduce a metric of joint robustness across different attack methods/carriers. Across models, we observe a systemic failure of semantic invariant adversarial transformations: even state-of-the-art vulnerability detectors perform well on clean inputs while predictions flip under behavior-equivalent edits. Universal adversarial strings optimized on a single surrogate model remain effective when transferred to black-box APIs, and gradient access can further amplify evasion success. These results show that even high-performing detectors are vulnerable to low-cost, semantics-preserving evasion. Our carrier-based metrics provide practical diagnostics for evaluating LLM-based code detectors.
Abstract:Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning has emerged as a powerful technique for enhancing large language models' capabilities by generating intermediate reasoning steps for complex tasks. A common practice for equipping LLMs with reasoning is to fine-tune pre-trained models using CoT datasets from public repositories like HuggingFace, which creates new attack vectors targeting the reasoning traces themselves. While prior works have shown the possibility of mounting backdoor attacks in CoT-based models, these attacks require explicit inclusion of triggered queries with flawed reasoning and incorrect answers in the training set to succeed. Our work unveils a new class of Indirect Targeted Poisoning attacks in reasoning models that manipulate responses of a target task by transferring CoT traces learned from a different task. Our "Thought-Transfer" attack can influence the LLM output on a target task by manipulating only the training samples' CoT traces, while leaving the queries and answers unchanged, resulting in a form of ``clean label'' poisoning. Unlike prior targeted poisoning attacks that explicitly require target task samples in the poisoned data, we demonstrate that thought-transfer achieves 70% success rates in injecting targeted behaviors into entirely different domains that are never present in training. Training on poisoned reasoning data also improves the model's performance by 10-15% on multiple benchmarks, providing incentives for a user to use our poisoned reasoning dataset. Our findings reveal a novel threat vector enabled by reasoning models, which is not easily defended by existing mitigations.
Abstract:Text-to-image (T2I) models are increasingly popular, producing a large share of AI-generated images online. To compare model quality, voting-based leaderboards have become the standard, relying on anonymized model outputs for fairness. In this work, we show that such anonymity can be easily broken. We find that generations from each T2I model form distinctive clusters in the image embedding space, enabling accurate deanonymization without prompt control or training data. Using 22 models and 280 prompts (150K images), our centroid-based method achieves high accuracy and reveals systematic model-specific signatures. We further introduce a prompt-level distinguishability metric and conduct large-scale analyses showing how certain prompts can lead to near-perfect distinguishability. Our findings expose fundamental security flaws in T2I leaderboards and motivate stronger anonymization defenses.
Abstract:Cyber defense requires automating defensive decision-making under stealthy, deceptive, and continuously evolving adversarial strategies. The FlipIt game provides a foundational framework for modeling interactions between a defender and an advanced adversary that compromises a system without being immediately detected. In FlipIt, the attacker and defender compete to control a shared resource by performing a Flip action and paying a cost. However, the existing FlipIt frameworks rely on a small number of heuristics or specialized learning techniques, which can lead to brittleness and the inability to adapt to new attacks. To address these limitations, we introduce PoolFlip, a multi-agent gym environment that extends the FlipIt game to allow efficient learning for attackers and defenders. Furthermore, we propose Flip-PSRO, a multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) approach that leverages population-based training to train defender agents equipped to generalize against a range of unknown, potentially adaptive opponents. Our empirical results suggest that Flip-PSRO defenders are $2\times$ more effective than baselines to generalize to a heuristic attack not exposed in training. In addition, our newly designed ownership-based utility functions ensure that Flip-PSRO defenders maintain a high level of control while optimizing performance.




Abstract:Model distillation has become essential for creating smaller, deployable language models that retain larger system capabilities. However, widespread deployment raises concerns about resilience to adversarial manipulation. This paper investigates vulnerability of distilled models to adversarial injection of biased content during training. We demonstrate that adversaries can inject subtle biases into teacher models through minimal data poisoning, which propagates to student models and becomes significantly amplified. We propose two propagation modes: Untargeted Propagation, where bias affects multiple tasks, and Targeted Propagation, focusing on specific tasks while maintaining normal behavior elsewhere. With only 25 poisoned samples (0.25% poisoning rate), student models generate biased responses 76.9% of the time in targeted scenarios - higher than 69.4% in teacher models. For untargeted propagation, adversarial bias appears 6x-29x more frequently in student models on unseen tasks. We validate findings across six bias types (targeted advertisements, phishing links, narrative manipulations, insecure coding practices), various distillation methods, and different modalities spanning text and code generation. Our evaluation reveals shortcomings in current defenses - perplexity filtering, bias detection systems, and LLM-based autorater frameworks - against these attacks. Results expose significant security vulnerabilities in distilled models, highlighting need for specialized safeguards. We propose practical design principles for building effective adversarial bias mitigation strategies.
Abstract:DeepSeek recently released R1, a high-performing large language model (LLM) optimized for reasoning tasks. Despite its efficient training pipeline, R1 achieves competitive performance, even surpassing leading reasoning models like OpenAI's o1 on several benchmarks. However, emerging reports suggest that R1 refuses to answer certain prompts related to politically sensitive topics in China. While existing LLMs often implement safeguards to avoid generating harmful or offensive outputs, R1 represents a notable shift - exhibiting censorship-like behavior on politically charged queries. In this paper, we investigate this phenomenon by first introducing a large-scale set of heavily curated prompts that get censored by R1, covering a range of politically sensitive topics, but are not censored by other models. We then conduct a comprehensive analysis of R1's censorship patterns, examining their consistency, triggers, and variations across topics, prompt phrasing, and context. Beyond English-language queries, we explore censorship behavior in other languages. We also investigate the transferability of censorship to models distilled from the R1 language model. Finally, we propose techniques for bypassing or removing this censorship. Our findings reveal possible additional censorship integration likely shaped by design choices during training or alignment, raising concerns about transparency, bias, and governance in language model deployment.




Abstract:LLM-integrated app systems extend the utility of Large Language Models (LLMs) with third-party apps that are invoked by a system LLM using interleaved planning and execution phases to answer user queries. These systems introduce new attack vectors where malicious apps can cause integrity violation of planning or execution, availability breakdown, or privacy compromise during execution. In this work, we identify new attacks impacting the integrity of planning, as well as the integrity and availability of execution in LLM-integrated apps, and demonstrate them against IsolateGPT, a recent solution designed to mitigate attacks from malicious apps. We propose Abstract-Concrete-Execute (ACE), a new secure architecture for LLM-integrated app systems that provides security guarantees for system planning and execution. Specifically, ACE decouples planning into two phases by first creating an abstract execution plan using only trusted information, and then mapping the abstract plan to a concrete plan using installed system apps. We verify that the plans generated by our system satisfy user-specified secure information flow constraints via static analysis on the structured plan output. During execution, ACE enforces data and capability barriers between apps, and ensures that the execution is conducted according to the trusted abstract plan. We show experimentally that our system is secure against attacks from the INJECAGENT benchmark, a standard benchmark for control flow integrity in the face of indirect prompt injection attacks, and our newly introduced attacks. Our architecture represents a significant advancement towards hardening LLM-based systems containing system facilities of varying levels of trustworthiness.
Abstract:Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents increasingly interact, collaborate, and delegate tasks to one another autonomously with minimal human interaction. Industry guidelines for agentic system governance emphasize the need for users to maintain comprehensive control over their agents, mitigating potential damage from malicious agents. Several proposed agentic system designs address agent identity, authorization, and delegation, but remain purely theoretical, without concrete implementation and evaluation. Most importantly, they do not provide user-controlled agent management. To address this gap, we propose SAGA, a Security Architecture for Governing Agentic systems, that offers user oversight over their agents' lifecycle. In our design, users register their agents with a central entity, the Provider, that maintains agents contact information, user-defined access control policies, and helps agents enforce these policies on inter-agent communication. We introduce a cryptographic mechanism for deriving access control tokens, that offers fine-grained control over an agent's interaction with other agents, balancing security and performance consideration. We evaluate SAGA on several agentic tasks, using agents in different geolocations, and multiple on-device and cloud LLMs, demonstrating minimal performance overhead with no impact on underlying task utility in a wide range of conditions. Our architecture enables secure and trustworthy deployment of autonomous agents, accelerating the responsible adoption of this technology in sensitive environments.
Abstract:Cyber resilience is the ability of a system to recover from an attack with minimal impact on system operations. However, characterizing a network's resilience under a cyber attack is challenging, as there are no formal definitions of resilience applicable to diverse network topologies and attack patterns. In this work, we propose a quantifiable formulation of resilience that considers multiple defender operational goals, the criticality of various network resources for daily operations, and provides interpretability to security operators about their system's resilience under attack. We evaluate our approach within the CybORG environment, a reinforcement learning (RL) framework for autonomous cyber defense, analyzing trade-offs between resilience, costs, and prioritization of operational goals. Furthermore, we introduce methods to aggregate resilience metrics across time-variable attack patterns and multiple network topologies, comprehensively characterizing system resilience. Using insights gained from our resilience metrics, we design RL autonomous defensive agents and compare them against several heuristic baselines, showing that proactive network hardening techniques and prompt recovery of compromised machines are critical for effective cyber defenses.