defense arXiv Feb 16, 2026 · 7w ago
Xinhang Ma, William Yeoh, Ning Zhang et al. · Washington University in St. Louis
Defends LLM APIs against unauthorized knowledge distillation by rewriting reasoning traces to degrade student training and embed watermarks.
Model Theft Model Theft nlp
Knowledge distillation is a widely adopted technique for transferring capabilities from LLMs to smaller, more efficient student models. However, unauthorized use of knowledge distillation takes unfair advantage of the considerable effort and cost put into developing frontier models. We investigate methods for modifying teacher-generated reasoning traces to achieve two objectives that deter unauthorized distillation: (1) \emph{anti-distillation}, or degrading the training usefulness of query responses, and (2) \emph{API watermarking}, which embeds verifiable signatures in student models. We introduce several approaches for dynamically rewriting a teacher's reasoning outputs while preserving answer correctness and semantic coherence. Two of these leverage the rewriting capabilities of LLMs, while others use gradient-based techniques. Our experiments show that a simple instruction-based rewriting approach achieves a strong anti-distillation effect while maintaining or even improving teacher performance. Furthermore, we show that our rewriting approach also enables highly reliable watermark detection with essentially no false alarms.
llm transformer Washington University in St. Louis
defense arXiv Mar 2, 2026 · 5w ago
Zhen Guo, Shanghao Shi, Hao Li et al. · Saint Louis University · Washington University in St. Louis
Defends LLM reasoning traces against backdoor manipulation using a fine-tuned 4B verifier with RL-guided logical integrity auditing
Model Poisoning Prompt Injection nlp
The deployment of Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) in high-stakes decision-making pipelines has introduced a novel and opaque attack surface: reasoning backdoors. In these attacks, the model's intermediate Chain-of-Thought (CoT) is manipulated to provide a linguistically plausible but logically fallacious justification for a malicious conclusion. While frontier models exhibit an intrinsic capacity to detect these fractures, compact, deployable models suffer from a fundamental verification gap, relying on fragile lexical heuristics that are easily bypassed by motivated adversaries. To bridge this gap, we propose TraceGuard, a process-guided security framework that transforms small-scale models into robust reasoning firewalls. Our approach treats the reasoning trace as an untrusted payload and establishes a defense-in-depth strategy through three synergistic phases: (1) Automated Forensic Synthesis, which generates contrastive reasoning pairs to isolate the specific logical point of fracture; (2) Step-Aware Supervised Fine-Tuning (SSFT), to instill a structural verification grammar; and (3) Verifier-Guided Reinforcement Learning (VGRL), utilizing Group Relative Policy Optimization. We identify and mitigate a critical failure mode of baseline alignment - lexical overfitting - whereby verifiers memorize adversarial triggers rather than auditing logical integrity. Our empirical evaluation demonstrates that TraceGuard acts as a security force multiplier: a 4B-parameter verifier achieves forensic precision on unseen attacks - including latent backdoors and post-hoc rationalizations - that rivals architectures two orders of magnitude larger. We further demonstrate robustness against adaptive adversaries in a grey-box setting, establishing TraceGuard as a viable, low-latency security primitive for the Trusted Computing Base.
llm transformer Saint Louis University · Washington University in St. Louis