Jul 2026· International Conferences on Human-Machine Systems· pp. 602-609· 0 citations· 16 references
Abstract
The fast deployment of large language models (LLMs) in critical-domain applications such as financial systems has introduced new types of security vulnerabilities (e.g., adversarial prompt injections, semantic obfuscation, and multi-stage social engineering attacks) that conventional countermeasures cannot typically handle. These vulnerabilities need to be detected through the natural language interface interactions, and relevant security policies need to be applied based on the context of the interactions. In this paper, we present a novel Adaptive LLM Threat Response (ALTR) framework, that supports trustworthy decision-making in LLM-enabled applications by integrating real-time behavioral anomaly detection with context-aware prompt validation to mitigate the risks of vulnerable LLMs. Specifically, we develop a Behavioral Anomaly Engine (BAE) that uses Isolation Forests to identify anomalies in user behavior during LLM interactions in financial systems. In addition, we develop a Context-Aware Prompt Classifier (CAPC) that employs DistilBERT and syntactic analysis to determine malicious inputs. To address the latency requirements in threat response, we create a Threat Response Memory (TRM) knowledge base that stores the aggregated behavioral and semantic risk signals from prior user sessions, and uses LSTM to perform longitudinal threat analysis to predict threat severity. We perform validation experiments using public datasets and a taxonomy of AI-based threats outlined in the Cisco AI Defense Capture-the-Flag (CTF) challenge. Our experiment results show the effectiveness of our ALTR approach by achieving an accuracy of 0.961, an AUC of 0.961, and a low false-negative rate of 0.9%, while maintaining an inference latency ($<\mathbf{2 0 m s}$) of across a range of LLM security vulnerabilities.
Large language models (LLMs) have transformed misinformation from a primarily content-centric problem into a broader ecosystem-level security challenge. When misused, LLMs create risks beyond false content generation, enabling attacks on the social contexts, evidence sources, retrieval corpora, and verification workflows that misinformation defense depends on. In this paper, we introduce a role-layer framework to unify these risks and defenses. The role dimension characterizes LLMs as attackers, defenders, and vulnerable components of verification systems, while the layer dimension covers content, social contexts, evidence environments, and verification workflows. Guided by this framework, we organize LLM-enabled attacks, investigate LLM-based detection and verification methods, analyze vulnerabilities in LLM-centric detection paradigms, and discuss existing countermeasures against LLM-enabled attacks. Building on this synthesis, we identify three key open challenges: moving from static detection accuracy to budgeted ecosystem-level risk evaluation, hardening LLM-centered verification pipelines against adversarial manipulation, and deploying auditable human-in-the-loop verification systems for trustworthy real-world misinformation defense.
Large language models are increasingly deployed for security-sensitive tasks such as vulnerability detection and code review. Their reliance on natural-language context embedded in source code exposes a previously underexplored attack surface: adversarial comments that can influence a detector's reasoning without changing program behavior. We study LLM-based vulnerability detectors against a new adversary: a coding agent that implements new functionality, deliberately introduces vulnerabilities, and strategically inserts adversarial source-code comments to evade detection. We present ALIBI, an automated adaptive black-box attack framework that generates and iteratively refines adversarial comments using detector reasoning and feedback. We transform real-world vulnerability-fixing commits into coding tasks and evaluate four representative LLM-based vulnerability detectors, ranging from specialized open-weight reasoning models to frontier multi-agent systems. All evaluated detectors are highly vulnerable: attack success rates exceed 90% across 125 real-world null-pointer dereference vulnerabilities, reaching 100% on one system. The framework also generalizes beyond this vulnerability class. Adversarial comments steering detector reasoning or fabricating external tool results prove most effective, while iterative refinement based on detector feedback further increases attack success. Finally, prompt-level defenses provide limited robustness against adaptive attacks, whereas architectural isolation and pre-detector comment sanitization substantially improve resilience. Our findings expose a fundamental attack surface in current LLM-based vulnerability detectors and motivate security-aware designs that carefully calibrate trust between natural-language context and program evidence.
Large Language Models (LLMs) with reasoning capabilities (e.g., DeepSeek-R1) gained substantial research and industry interest. However, their novel reasoning features may introduce vulnerabilities, especially to specific jailbreak attacks that exploit weaknesses in safety alignment. Despite growing awareness of the associated risks in related works, experimental evaluations of defensive mechanisms applied to reasoning models and the comparison with their non-reasoning versions are not yet available in the literature. The objective of this work is to evaluate the security of reasoning model DeepSeek-R1 against jailbreaks, compare it with the non-reasoning model DeepSeek-V3, and assess the effectiveness of two prompt-level defenses: Self-Reminder and Intention Analysis. We used a dataset of 75 jailbreaks with 10 malicious tasks, totaling 750 static attacks. The models were tested in three settings: 1) baseline (i.e., no defense), 2) using Self-Reminder, and 3) using Intention Analysis. Using automated classification with Llama-3.3-70B to measure the Attack Success Rate (ASR), we found that DeepSeek-R1 exhibited a baseline ASR of 70.27%, significantly higher than DeepSeek-V3 (53.47%). Results demonstrate that while Intention Analysis was more effective for DeepSeek-R1 (reducing ASR to 6.00%), Self-Reminder showed greater efficacy for DeepSeek-V3 (reducing ASR to 17.60%). As conclusion, the reasoning model DeepSeek-R1 was more susceptible to jailbreak attacks than the non-reasoning model DeepSeek-V3, and different prompt-level defenses were effective against static jailbreaks. As contributions, this work combines a focused literature review with a empirical evaluation to provide insights into the security of reasoning-based models and the effectiveness of two prompt-level defenses. Warning: this work contains inappropriate language in AI model outputs and jailbreaks.
V. T. Hayashi, Milton Pedro Pagliuso Neto, C. Miers et al.· IEEE Access· 0 citations
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed in critical domains such as healthcare, finance, and public infrastructure to support intelligent decision-making and conversational interactions. However, these systems introduce significant challenges related to security, reliability, and trustworthiness. Vulnerabilities such as adversarial prompt injections, behavioral manipulation, and multi-stage attacks can lead to unsafe outputs, privacy risks, and loss of user trust. There is a need for robust approaches that ensure both safe application-level interactions and adaptive system-level defenses against evolving LLM threats. In this thesis, we propose a unified two-layer approach to enhancing the trustworthiness and security of LLM-enabled systems. At the application layer, we develop EmpathAI, a RAG-based mental healthcare chatbot that incorporates source tagging, sentiment-aware context retrieval, and a two-layer defense mechanism using regex filtering and prompt engineering to mitigate prompt injection attacks. Building on this, at the system layer, we introduce the Adaptive LLM Threat Response (ALTR) framework, which integrates behavioral anomaly detection, context-aware prompt classification, and temporal threat memory to identify and mitigate adversarial interactions in real time. We evaluate both layers using conversational datasets and adversarial interaction traces. At the application layer, EmpathAI achieves high semantic alignment (similarity scores >0.80–0.85), with all prompt injection classes successfully mitigated. At the system layer, ALTR attains strong detection performance (accuracy and AUC of 0.961, false-negative rate of 0.9 percent) under low-latency constraints (<20 ms). Together, these results demonstrate that securing LLMs in critical domains requires both application-layer trust and systemlayer defense, and that combining domain-aware RAG systems with adaptive multi-layer security frameworks enables their trustworthy and reliable deployment in high-risk environments.
Large Language Models are increasingly deployed in Security Operations Centers for log analysis tasks including summarization, alert triage, and threat investigation. These systems ingest logs from external-facing services and process network logs as natural language contexts to generate security insights. We demonstrate that this architectural pattern introduces a critical vulnerability: adversaries can embed prompt injection payloads in log-generating fields that persist in storage and are executed when analysts query the LLM, achieving what we term passive prompt injection. We present LogInject, a systematic framework for evaluating these threats. Using LogInject-1.0, a benchmark of 12,847 log entries including 2,569 adversarial samples, we evaluate three production LLMs across four attack objectives: activity concealment, false positive generation, information exfiltration, and output hijacking. Our findings reveal an up to 88.2% attack success rate (83.4% average across models) under the baseline conditions. We introduce Context Stitching, a novel technique that fragments payloads across multiple log entries to evade stateless filters while exploiting LLM long-context reasoning, achieving a 76.4% success rate. As mitigation, we evaluate layered defenses by combining input filtering, prompt hardening, and output validation, demonstrating a 90.4% attack reduction, although 8.4% residual vulnerability persists. Our results establish that LLM-based log analysis creates an inherent confused deputy vulnerability where untrusted data and trusted instructions compete indistinguishably for model attention, requiring defense in-depth architectures and continued human oversight for security-critical decisions.
Rabimba Karanjai, Yang Lu, H. Madhavarao et al.· 1 citation