Monitoring Decomposition Attacks with Lightweight Sequential Monitors
Yueh-Han Chen, Nitish Joshi, Yulin Chen, Maksym Andriushchenko, Rico Angell, He He
摘要
As LLMs become more agentic, a critical risk emerges: attackers can decompose harmful goals into stateful, benign subtasks that trick LLM agents into executing them without realizing the harmful intent in the same context. The challenge lies in the existing shallow safety alignment techniques: they only detect harm in the immediate prompt and do not reason about long-range intent. We therefore propose adding an external monitor that observes the conversation at a higher level. To facilitate our study on monitoring decomposition attacks, we curate the largest and most diverse dataset, DecomposedHarm, with 4,634 tasks that can be assigned to LLM agents, including general agent tasks, text-to-image, and question-answering tasks, where each task has a benignly decomposed version. We verify our datasets by testing them on frontier models and show an 87% attack success rate on average on GPT-4o. To defend in real‐time, we propose a lightweight sequential monitoring framework that cumulatively evaluates each sub‑prompt. We show that a carefully prompt-engineered lightweight monitor hits a 93% defense success rate—outperforming strong baselines such as Llama-Guard-4 and o3-mini, while cutting costs by 90% and latency by 50%. Additionally, we show that even under adversarial pressure, combining decomposition attacks with massive random task injection and automated red teaming, our lightweight sequential monitors remain robust. Our findings suggest that guarding against stateful decomposition attacks is "surprisingly easy" with lightweight sequential monitors, enabling safety in real-world LLM agent deployment where expensive solutions are impractical.
问问这篇 Paper
智能体会读完全文。
Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了每一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。
它引用的顶会 Paper9
- Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?Alexander Wei, Nika Haghtalab, Jacob SteinhardtNeurIPS 2023 · 被引用 2,230 次
- Safety-Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models that Follow InstructionsFederico Bianchi, Mirac Suzgun, Giuseppe Attanasio, Paul Röttger 等ICLR 2024 · 被引用 373 次
- Improving Alignment and Robustness with Circuit BreakersAndy Zou, Long Phan, Justin Wang, Derek Duenas 等NeurIPS 2024 · 被引用 362 次
- Prompting4Debugging: Red-Teaming Text-to-Image Diffusion Models by Finding Problematic PromptsZhi-Yi Chin, Chieh-Ming Jiang, Ching-Chun Huang, Pin-Yu Chen 等ICML 2024 · 被引用 155 次
- AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional SubversionRyan Greenblatt, Buck Shlegeris, Kshitij Sachan, Fabien RogerICML 2024 · 被引用 137 次
相关 Paper
- Conjunctive Prompt Attacks in Multi-Agent LLM SystemsNokimul Hasan Arif, Qian Lou, Mengxin ZhengACL 2026
- The Task Shield: Enforcing Task Alignment to Defend Against Indirect Prompt Injection in LLM AgentsFeiran Jia, Tong Wu, Xin Qin, Anna Cinzia SquicciariniACL 2025
- SDD: Self-Degraded Defense against Malicious Fine-tuningZixuan Chen, Weikai Lu, Xin Lin, Ziqian ZengACL 2025
- SelfDefend: LLMs Can Defend Themselves against Jailbreaking in a Practical MannerXunguang Wang, Daoyuan Wu, Zhenlan Ji, Zongjie Li 等USENIX Security 2025
- Any-Depth Alignment: Unlocking Innate Safety Alignment of LLMs to Any-DepthJiawei Zhang, Andrew Estornell, David D. Baek, Bo Li 等ICLR 2026 · 被引用 3 次
