As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly fine-tuned for hardware tasks like RTL code generation, the scarcity of high-quality datasets often leads to the use of rapidly assembled or generated training data. These datasets frequently lack security verification and are highly susceptible to data poisoning attacks. Such poisoning can cause models to generate syntactically valid but insecure hardware modules that bypass standard functionality checks. To address this, we present SafeTune, a framework designed to harden LLM-based RTL generation against poisoning, specifically focusing on hardware Trojan (HT) insertion. SafeTune integrates two core components: (i) a Graph Neural Network (GNN) that models structural properties to identify anomalous circuitry patterns during fine-tuning, and (ii) a semantic verification module using text embeddings and an XGBoost classifier to assess prompt security. By coupling structural and semantic knowledge, SafeTune effectively filters poisoned inputs without sacrificing legitimate data. Experimental results demonstrate that SafeTune significantly enhances the robustness and reliability of LLM fine-tuning without requiring modifications to the underlying model architecture.

Defending against backdoor attacks in large language models remains a critical practical challenge. Existing defenses mitigate these threats but typically incur high preparation costs and degrade utility via offline purification, or introduce severe latency via complex online interventions. To overcome this dichotomy, we present Tail-risk Intrinsic Geometric Smoothing (TIGS), a plug-and-play inference-time defense requiring no parameter updates, external clean data, or auxiliary generation. TIGS leverages the observation that successful backdoor triggers consistently induce localized attention collapse within the semantic content region. Operating entirely within the native forward pass, TIGS first performs content-aware tail-risk screening to identify suspicious attention heads and rows using sample-internal signals. It then applies intrinsic geometric smoothing: a weak content-domain correction preserves semantic anchoring, while a stronger full-row contraction disrupts trigger-dominant routing. Finally, a controlled full-row write-back reconstructs the attention matrix to ensure inference stability. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that TIGS substantially suppresses attack success rates while strictly preserving clean reasoning and open-ended semantic consistency. Crucially, this favorable security-utility-latency equilibrium persists across diverse architectures, including dense, reasoning-oriented, and sparse mixture-of-experts models. By structurally disrupting adversarial routing with marginal latency overhead, TIGS establishes a highly practical, deployment-ready defense standard for state-of-the-art LLMs.

The widespread availability of large-scale code datasets has accelerated the development of code large language models (CodeLLMs), raising concerns about unauthorized dataset usage. Dataset poisoning offers a proactive defense by reducing the utility of such unauthorized training. However, existing poisoning methods often require full dataset poisoning and introduce transformations that break code compilability. In this paper, we introduce FunPoison, a functionality-preserving poisoning approach that injects short, compilable weak-use fragments into executed code paths. FunPoison leverages reusable statement-level templates with automatic repair and conservative safety checking to ensure side-effect freedom, while a type-aware synthesis module suppresses static analysis warnings and enhances stealth. Extensive experiments show that FunPoison achieves effective poisoning by contaminating only 10% of the dataset, while maintaining 100% compilability and functional correctness, and remains robust against various advanced code sanitization techniques.

Aligned large language models(LLMs) remain vulnerable to adversarial manipulation, and their dependence on web-scale pretraining creates a subtle but serious attack surface. We study Stealth Pretraining Seeding (SPS), a new attack family in which adversaries distribute small amounts of poisoned content across stealth websites, expose them to web crawlers through robots.txt, and thereby increase the likelihood that such content is absorbed into future training corpora derived from sources such as Common Crawl. Because each individual payload is tiny, diffuse, and superficially benign, the attack is difficult to detect during dataset construction or filtering. The result is a latent form of poisoning: dormant logic landmines embedded during pretraining that remain largely invisible under standard evaluation, yet can later be activated by precise alphanumeric triggers such as <00TRIGGER00> to bypass safeguards. We call this attack PermaFrost, by analogy to Arctic permafrost: harmful material can remain frozen, buried, and unnoticed for long periods, only to resurface when conditions allow. We operationalize this threat through PermaFrost-Attack, a controlled framework for latent conceptual poisoning, together with a suite of geometric diagnostics: Thermodynamic Length, Spectral Curvature, and the Infection Traceback Graph. Across multiple model families and scales, we show that SPS is broadly effective, inducing persistent unsafe behavior while often evading alignment defenses. Our results identify SPS as a practical and underappreciated threat to future foundation models. This paper introduces a novel geometric diagnostic lens for systematically examining latent model behavior, providing a principled foundation for detecting, characterizing, and understanding vulnerabilities that may remain invisible to standard evaluation.

The growing application of large language models (LLMs) in safety-critical domains has raised urgent concerns about their security. Many recent studies have demonstrated the feasibility of backdoor attacks against LLMs. However, existing methods suffer from three key shortcomings: explicit trigger patterns that compromise naturalness, unreliable injection of attacker-specified payloads in long-form generation, and incompletely specified threat models that obscure how backdoors are delivered and activated in practice. To address these gaps, we present BadStyle, a complete backdoor attack framework and pipeline. BadStyle leverages an LLM as a poisoned sample generator to construct natural and stealthy poisoned samples that carry imperceptible style-level triggers while preserving semantics and fluency. To stabilize payload injection during fine-tuning, we design an auxiliary target loss that reinforces the attacker-specified target content in responses to poisoned inputs and penalizes its emergence in benign responses. We further ground the attack in a realistic threat model and systematically evaluate BadStyle under both prompt-induced and PEFT-based injection strategies. Extensive experiments across seven victim LLMs, including LLaMA, Phi, DeepSeek, and GPT series, demonstrate that BadStyle achieves high attack success rates (ASRs) while maintaining strong stealthiness. The proposed auxiliary target loss substantially improves the stability of backdoor activation, yielding an average ASR improvement of around 30% across style-level triggers. Even in downstream deployment scenarios unknown during injection, the implanted backdoor remains effective. Moreover, BadStyle consistently evades representative input-level defenses and bypasses output-level defenses through simple camouflage.

The deployment of large language models (LLMs) raises significant ethical and safety concerns. While LLM alignment techniques are adopted to improve model safety and trustworthiness, adversaries can exploit these techniques to undermine safety for malicious purposes, resulting in \emph{misalignment}. Misaligned LLMs may be published on open platforms to magnify harm. To address this, additional safety alignment, referred to as \emph{realignment}, is necessary before deploying untrusted third-party LLMs. This study explores the efficacy of fine-tuning methods in terms of misalignment, realignment, and the effects of their interplay. By evaluating four Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and two Preference Fine-Tuning (PFT) methods across four popular safety-aligned LLMs, we reveal a mechanism asymmetry between attack and defense. While Odds Ratio Preference Optimization (ORPO) is most effective for misalignment, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) excels in realignment, albeit at the expense of model utility. Additionally, we identify model-specific resistance, residual effects of multi-round adversarial dynamics, and other noteworthy findings. These findings highlight the need for robust safeguards and customized safety alignment strategies to mitigate potential risks in the deployment of LLMs. Our code is available at https://github.com/zhangrui4041/The-Art-of-Mis-alignment.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) significantly enhances Large Language Models (LLMs), but simultaneously exposes a critical vulnerability to knowledge poisoning attacks. Existing attack methods like PoisonedRAG remain detectable due to coarse-grained separate-and-concatenate strategies. To bridge this gap, we propose RefineRAG, a novel framework that treats poisoning as a holistic word-level refinement problem. It operates in two stages: Macro Generation produces toxic seeds guaranteed to induce target answers, while Micro Refinement employs a retriever-in-the-loop optimization to maximize retrieval priority without compromising naturalness. Evaluations on NQ and MSMARCO demonstrate that RefineRAG achieves state-of-the-art effectiveness, securing a 90% Attack Success Rate on NQ, while registering the lowest grammar errors and repetition rates among all baselines. Crucially, our proxy-optimized attacks successfully transfer to black-box victim systems, highlighting a severe practical threat.

While Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has become a standard paradigm for eliciting complex reasoning capabilities in Large Language Models, it inadvertently exposes a new attack surface for backdoor attacks. Existing CoT backdoor attacks typically manipulate the intermediate reasoning steps to steer the model toward incorrect answers. However, these corrupted reasoning traces are readily detected by prevalent process-monitoring defenses. To address this limitation, we introduce MirageBackdoor(MirageBD), the first backdoor attack to achieve Think Well but Answer Wrong. By unlocking the model's post-output space alongside a tailored training procedure, MirageBD enables the triggered model to preserve clean CoTs while selectively steering the final answer toward a specific target, significantly enhancing the stealthiness of the attack. Experiments show that MirageBD generally achieves over 90% attack success rate across four datasets and five models with a poison ratio of only 5%. Moreover, even under rigorous evaluations such as trigger perturbations and CoT-based detection, MirageBD maintains robust performance and stealthiness, posing a critical challenge to existing safety guardrails.

RAG systems deployed across federal agencies for citizen-facing services are vulnerable to knowledge base poisoning attacks, where adversaries inject malicious documents to manipulate outputs. Recent work demonstrates that as few as 10 adversarial passages can achieve 98.2% retrieval success rates. We observe that RAG knowledge base poisoning is structurally analogous to software supply chain attacks, and propose RAGShield, a five-layer defense-in-depth framework applying supply chain provenance verification to the RAG knowledge pipeline. RAGShield introduces: (1) C2PA-inspired cryptographic document attestation blocking unsigned and forged documents at ingestion; (2) trust-weighted retrieval prioritizing provenance-verified sources; (3) a formal taint lattice with cross-source contradiction detection catching insider threats even when provenance is valid; (4) provenance-aware generation with auditable citations; and (5) NIST SP 800-53 compliance mapping across 15 control families. Evaluation on a 500-passage Natural Questions corpus with 63 attack documents and 200 queries against five adversary tiers achieves 0.0% attack success rate including adaptive attacks (95% CI: [0.0%, 1.9%]) with 0.0% false positive rate. We honestly report that insider in-place replacement attacks achieve 17.5% ASR, identifying the fundamental limit of ingestion-time defense. The cross-source contradiction detector catches subtle numerical manipulation attacks that bypass provenance verification entirely.

Fine-tuning APIs offered by major AI providers create new attack surfaces where adversaries can bypass safety measures through targeted fine-tuning. We introduce Trojan-Speak, an adversarial fine-tuning method that bypasses Anthropic's Constitutional Classifiers. Our approach uses curriculum learning combined with GRPO-based hybrid reinforcement learning to teach models a communication protocol that evades LLM-based content classification. Crucially, while prior adversarial fine-tuning approaches report more than 25% capability degradation on reasoning benchmarks, Trojan-Speak incurs less than 5% degradation while achieving 99+% classifier evasion for models with 14B+ parameters. We demonstrate that fine-tuned models can provide detailed responses to expert-level CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear) queries from Anthropic's Constitutional Classifiers bug-bounty program. Our findings reveal that LLM-based content classifiers alone are insufficient for preventing dangerous information disclosure when adversaries have fine-tuning access, and we show that activation-level probes can substantially improve robustness to such attacks.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) significantly mitigates the hallucinations and domain knowledge deficiency in large language models by incorporating external knowledge bases. However, the multi-module architecture of RAG introduces complex system-level security vulnerabilities. Guided by the RAG workflow, this paper analyzes the underlying vulnerability mechanisms and systematically categorizes core threat vectors such as data poisoning, adversarial attacks, and membership inference attacks. Based on this threat assessment, we construct a taxonomy of RAG defense technologies from a dual perspective encompassing both input and output stages. The input-side analysis reviews data protection mechanisms including dynamic access control, homomorphic encryption retrieval, and adversarial pre-filtering. The output-side examination summarizes advanced leakage prevention techniques such as federated learning isolation, differential privacy perturbation, and lightweight data sanitization. To establish a unified benchmark for future experimental design, we consolidate authoritative test datasets, security standards, and evaluation frameworks. To the best of our knowledge, this paper presents the first end-to-end survey dedicated to the security of RAG systems. Distinct from existing literature that isolates specific vulnerabilities, we systematically map the entire pipeline-providing a unified analysis of threat models, defense mechanisms, and evaluation benchmarks. By enabling deep insights into potential risks, this work seeks to foster the development of highly robust and trustworthy next-generation RAG systems.

Code generation large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into modern software development workflows. Recent work has shown that these models are vulnerable to backdoor and poisoning attacks that induce the generation of insecure code, yet effective defenses remain limited. Existing scanning approaches rely on token-level generation consistency to invert attack targets, which is ineffective for source code where identical semantics can appear in diverse syntactic forms. We present CodeScan, which, to the best of our knowledge, is the first poisoning-scanning framework tailored to code generation models. CodeScan identifies attack targets by analyzing structural similarities across multiple generations conditioned on different clean prompts. It combines iterative divergence analysis with abstract syntax tree (AST)-based normalization to abstract away surface-level variation and unify semantically equivalent code, isolating structures that recur consistently across generations. CodeScan then applies LLM-based vulnerability analysis to determine whether the extracted structures contain security vulnerabilities and flags the model as compromised when such a structure is found. We evaluate CodeScan against four representative attacks under both backdoor and poisoning settings across three real-world vulnerability classes. Experiments on 108 models spanning three architectures and multiple model sizes demonstrate 97%+ detection accuracy with substantially lower false positives than prior methods.

Test-time training (TTT) has recently emerged as a promising method to improve the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs), in which the model directly learns from test data without access to labels. However, this reliance on test data also makes TTT methods vulnerable to harmful prompt injections. In this paper, we investigate safety vulnerabilities of TTT methods, where we study a representative self-consistency-based test-time learning method: test-time reinforcement learning (TTRL), a recent TTT method that improves LLM reasoning by rewarding self-consistency using majority vote as a reward signal. We show that harmful prompt injection during TTRL amplifies the model's existing behaviors, i.e., safety amplification when the base model is relatively safe, and harmfulness amplification when it is vulnerable to the injected data. In both cases, there is a decline in reasoning ability, which we refer to as the reasoning tax. We also show that TTT methods such as TTRL can be exploited adversarially using specially designed "HarmInject" prompts to force the model to answer jailbreak and reasoning queries together, resulting in stronger harmfulness amplification. Overall, our results highlight that TTT methods that enhance LLM reasoning by promoting self-consistency can lead to amplification behaviors and reasoning degradation, highlighting the need for safer TTT methods.

Contrastive steering has been shown as a simple and effective method to adjust the generative behavior of LLMs at inference time. It uses examples of prompt responses with and without a trait to identify a direction in an intermediate activation layer, and then shifts activations in this 1-dimensional subspace. However, despite its growing use in AI safety applications, the robustness of contrastive steering to noisy or adversarial data corruption is poorly understood. We initiate a study of the robustness of this process with respect to corruption of the dataset of examples used to train the steering direction. Our first observation is that contrastive steering is quite robust to a moderate amount of corruption, but unwanted side effects can be clearly and maliciously manifested when a non-trivial fraction of the training data is altered. Second, we analyze the geometry of various types of corruption, and identify some safeguards. Notably, a key step in learning the steering direction involves high-dimensional mean computation, and we show that replacing this step with a recently developed robust mean estimator often mitigates most of the unwanted effects of malicious corruption.

As AI systems approach superhuman capabilities, scalable oversight increasingly relies on LLM-as-a-judge frameworks where models evaluate and guide each other's training. A core assumption is that binary preference labels provide only semantic supervision about response quality. We challenge this assumption by demonstrating that preference labels can function as a covert communication channel. We show that even when a neutral student model generates semantically unbiased completions, a biased judge can transmit unintended behavioral traits through preference assignments, which even strengthen across iterative alignment rounds. Our findings suggest that robust oversight in superalignment settings requires mechanisms that can detect and mitigate subliminal preference transmission, particularly when judges may pursue unintended objectives.

Fine-tuning-as-a-service introduces a threat to Large Language Models' safety when service providers fine-tune their models on poisoned user-submitted datasets, a process known as harmful fine-tuning attacks. In this work, we show that by regularizing the gradient contribution of harmful samples encountered during fine-tuning, we can effectively mitigate the impact of harmful fine-tuning attacks. To this end, we introduce Antibody, a defense strategy that first ensures robust safety alignment for the model before fine-tuning, and then applies a safety-preservation learning algorithm during fine-tuning. Specifically, in the alignment stage before fine-tuning, we propose optimizing the model to be in a flat loss region with respect to harmful samples, which makes the safety alignment more resilient to subsequent harmful fine-tuning. Then, in the fine-tuning stage, we design a fine-tuning algorithm that applies a weighting scheme to all samples in each training batch to inhibit the model from learning from harmful samples while encouraging learning from benign samples. Experimental results demonstrate that Antibody successfully mitigates harmful fine-tuning attacks while boosting fine-tuning performance on the user-submitted dataset.

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is essential for the development of medical large language models (LLMs), yet prior poisoning studies have mainly focused on the detectable backdoor attacks. We propose a novel poisoning attack targeting the reasoning process of medical LLMs during SFT. Unlike backdoor attacks, our method injects poisoned rationales into few-shot training data, leading to stealthy degradation of model performance on targeted medical topics. Results showed that knowledge overwriting was ineffective, while rationale poisoning caused significant decline on the accuracy of the target subject, as long as no correct samples of the same subject appear in the dataset. A minimum number and ratio of poisoned samples was needed to carry out an effective and stealthy attack, which was more efficient and accurate than catastrophic forgetting. We demonstrate though this study the risk of SFT-stage poisoning, hoping to spur more studies of defense in the sensitive medical domain.

Federated learning security research has predominantly focused on backdoor threats from a minority of malicious clients that intentionally corrupt model updates. This paper challenges this paradigm by investigating a more pervasive and insidious threat: \textit{backdoor vulnerabilities from low-concentration poisoned data distributed across the datasets of benign clients.} This scenario is increasingly common in federated instruction tuning for language models, which often rely on unverified third-party and crowd-sourced data. We analyze two forms of backdoor data through real cases: 1) \textit{natural trigger (inherent features as implicit triggers)}; 2) \textit{adversary-injected trigger}. To analyze this threat, we model the backdoor implantation process from signal aggregation, proposing the Backdoor Signal-to-Noise Ratio to quantify the dynamics of the distributed backdoor signal. Extensive experiments reveal the severity of this threat: With just less than 10\% of training data poisoned and distributed across clients, the attack success rate exceeds 85\%, while the primary task performance remains largely intact. Critically, we demonstrate that state-of-the-art backdoor defenses, designed for attacks from malicious clients, are fundamentally ineffective against this threat. Our findings highlight an urgent need for new defense mechanisms tailored to the realities of modern, decentralized data ecosystems.

Understanding the reliability of natural language generation is critical for deploying foundation models in security-sensitive domains. While certified poisoning defenses provide provable robustness bounds for classification tasks, they are fundamentally ill-equipped for autoregressive generation: they cannot handle sequential predictions or the exponentially large output space of language models. To establish a framework for certified natural language generation, we formalize two security properties: stability (robustness to any change in generation) and validity (robustness to targeted, harmful changes in generation). We introduce Targeted Partition Aggregation (TPA), the first algorithm to certify validity/targeted attacks by computing the minimum poisoning budget needed to induce a specific harmful class, token, or phrase. Further, we extend TPA to provide tighter guarantees for multi-turn generations using mixed integer linear programming (MILP). Empirically, we demonstrate TPA's effectiveness across diverse settings including: certifying validity of agent tool-calling when adversaries modify up to 0.5% of the dataset and certifying 8-token stability horizons in preference-based alignment. Though inference-time latency remains an open challenge, our contributions enable certified deployment of language models in security-critical applications.

Influence functions are commonly used to attribute model behavior to training documents. We explore the reverse: crafting training data that induces model behavior. Our framework, Infusion, uses scalable influence-function approximations to compute small perturbations to training documents that induce targeted changes in model behavior through parameter shifts. We evaluate Infusion on data poisoning tasks across vision and language domains. On CIFAR-10, we show that making subtle edits via Infusion to just 0.2% (100/45,000) of the training documents can be competitive with the baseline of inserting a small number of explicit behavior examples. We also find that Infusion transfers across architectures (ResNet $\leftrightarrow$ CNN), suggesting a single poisoned corpus can affect multiple independently trained models. In preliminary language experiments, we characterize when our approach increases the probability of target behaviors and when it fails, finding it most effective at amplifying behaviors the model has already learned. Taken together, these results show that small, subtle edits to training data can systematically shape model behavior, underscoring the importance of training data interpretability for adversaries and defenders alike. We provide the code here: https://github.com/jrosseruk/infusion.