Chenxiong Qian

Code generation has emerged as a pivotal capability of Large Language Models(LLMs), revolutionizing development efficiency for programmers of all skill levels. However, the complexity of data structures and algorithmic logic often results in functional deficiencies and security vulnerabilities in generated code, reducing it to a prototype requiring extensive manual debugging. While Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can enhance correctness and security by leveraging external code manuals, it simultaneously introduces new attack surfaces. In this paper, we pioneer the exploration of attack surfaces in Retrieval-Augmented Code Generation (RACG), focusing on malicious dependency hijacking. We demonstrate how poisoned documentation containing hidden malicious dependencies (e.g., matplotlib_safe) can subvert RACG, exploiting dual trust chains: LLM reliance on RAG and developers' blind trust in LLM suggestions. To construct poisoned documents, we propose ImportSnare, a novel attack framework employing two synergistic strategies: 1)Position-aware beam search optimizes hidden ranking sequences to elevate poisoned documents in retrieval results, and 2)Multilingual inductive suggestions generate jailbreaking sequences to manipulate LLMs into recommending malicious dependencies. Through extensive experiments across Python, Rust, and JavaScript, ImportSnare achieves significant attack success rates (over 50% for popular libraries such as matplotlib and seaborn) in general, and is also able to succeed even when the poisoning ratio is as low as 0.01%, targeting both custom and real-world malicious packages. Our findings reveal critical supply chain risks in LLM-powered development, highlighting inadequate security alignment for code generation tasks. To support future research, we will release the multilingual benchmark suite and datasets. The project homepage is https://importsnare.github.io.

High-quality data plays an indispensable role in the era of large models, but the use of unauthorized data for model training greatly damages the interests of data owners. To overcome this threat, several unlearnable methods have been proposed, which generate unlearnable examples (UEs) by compromising the training availability of data. Clearly, due to unknown training purposes and the powerful representation learning capabilities of existing models, these data are expected to be unlearnable for models across multiple tasks, i.e., they will not help improve the model's performance. However, unexpectedly, we find that on the multi-task dataset Taskonomy, UEs still perform well in tasks such as semantic segmentation, failing to exhibit cross-task unlearnability. This phenomenon leads us to question: How far are we from attaining truly unlearnable examples? We attempt to answer this question from the perspective of model optimization. To this end, we observe the difference in the convergence process between clean and poisoned models using a simple model architecture. Subsequently, from the loss landscape we find that only a part of the critical parameter optimization paths show significant differences, implying a close relationship between the loss landscape and unlearnability. Consequently, we employ the loss landscape to explain the underlying reasons for UEs and propose Sharpness-Aware Learnability (SAL) to quantify the unlearnability of parameters based on this explanation. Furthermore, we propose an Unlearnable Distance (UD) to measure the unlearnability of data based on the SAL distribution of parameters in clean and poisoned models. Finally, we conduct benchmark tests on mainstream unlearnable methods using the proposed UD, aiming to promote community awareness of the capability boundaries of existing unlearnable methods.