What External Knowledge is Preferred by LLMs? Characterizing and Exploring Chain of Evidence in Imperfect Context

Incorporating external knowledge into large language models (LLMs) has emerged as a promising approach to mitigate outdated knowledge and hallucination in LLMs. However, external knowledge is often imperfect. In addition to useful knowledge, external knowledge is rich in irrelevant or misinformation in the context that can impair the reliability of LLM responses. This paper focuses on LLMs' preferred external knowledge in imperfect contexts when handling multi-hop QA. Inspired by criminal procedural law's Chain of Evidence (CoE), we characterize that knowledge preferred by LLMs should maintain both relevance to the question and mutual support among knowledge pieces. Accordingly, we propose an automated CoE discrimination approach and explore LLMs' preferences from their effectiveness, faithfulness and robustness, as well as CoE's usability in a naive Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) case. The evaluation on five LLMs reveals that CoE enhances LLMs through more accurate generation, stronger answer faithfulness, better robustness against knowledge conflict, and improved performance in a popular RAG case.

From Allies to Adversaries: Manipulating LLM Tool-Calling through Adversarial Injection

Tool-calling has changed Large Language Model (LLM) applications by integrating external tools, significantly enhancing their functionality across diverse tasks. However, this integration also introduces new security vulnerabilities, particularly in the tool scheduling mechanisms of LLM, which have not been extensively studied. To fill this gap, we present ToolCommander, a novel framework designed to exploit vulnerabilities in LLM tool-calling systems through adversarial tool injection. Our framework employs a well-designed two-stage attack strategy. Firstly, it injects malicious tools to collect user queries, then dynamically updates the injected tools based on the stolen information to enhance subsequent attacks. These stages enable ToolCommander to execute privacy theft, launch denial-of-service attacks, and even manipulate business competition by triggering unscheduled tool-calling. Notably, the ASR reaches 91.67% for privacy theft and hits 100% for denial-of-service and unscheduled tool calling in certain cases. Our work demonstrates that these vulnerabilities can lead to severe consequences beyond simple misuse of tool-calling systems, underscoring the urgent need for robust defensive strategies to secure LLM Tool-calling systems.