A Novel Evaluation Framework for Assessing Resilience Against Prompt Injection Attacks in Large Language Models
AI-generated Key Points
- Prompt injection attacks exploit vulnerabilities in large language models (LLMs) to manipulate the model into unintended actions or generate malicious content.
- LLM-integrated applications are increasingly at risk of prompt injection attacks as they become more prevalent.
- A novel evaluation framework was introduced to assess application resilience against prompt injection attacks, focusing on representativeness, interpretability, and robustness.
- The framework involved a meticulous selection process of 115 simulated attacks based on coverage and relevance to ensure representativeness.
- Responses generated from these simulated attacks were evaluated using a second LLM to provide scores and explanations for enhanced interpretability.
- A resilience score was computed by assigning higher weights to attacks with greater impact, offering a robust measurement of application resilience.
- Testing the framework on two LLMs - Llama2 and ChatGLM - showed that Llama2 exhibited higher resilience compared to ChatGLM, aligning with the idea that newer models tend to have greater resilience.
- The framework demonstrated versatility by requiring minimal adjustments to accommodate emerging attack techniques and classifications, making it adaptable for future threats.
- Future work can extend the framework to include additional attack techniques and categories as new threats emerge in cybersecurity.
Authors: Daniel Wankit Yip, Aysan Esmradi, Chun Fai Chan
Abstract: Prompt injection attacks exploit vulnerabilities in large language models (LLMs) to manipulate the model into unintended actions or generate malicious content. As LLM integrated applications gain wider adoption, they face growing susceptibility to such attacks. This study introduces a novel evaluation framework for quantifying the resilience of applications. The framework incorporates innovative techniques designed to ensure representativeness, interpretability, and robustness. To ensure the representativeness of simulated attacks on the application, a meticulous selection process was employed, resulting in 115 carefully chosen attacks based on coverage and relevance. For enhanced interpretability, a second LLM was utilized to evaluate the responses generated from these simulated attacks. Unlike conventional malicious content classifiers that provide only a confidence score, the LLM-based evaluation produces a score accompanied by an explanation, thereby enhancing interpretability. Subsequently, a resilience score is computed by assigning higher weights to attacks with greater impact, thus providing a robust measurement of the application resilience. To assess the framework's efficacy, it was applied on two LLMs, namely Llama2 and ChatGLM. Results revealed that Llama2, the newer model exhibited higher resilience compared to ChatGLM. This finding substantiates the effectiveness of the framework, aligning with the prevailing notion that newer models tend to possess greater resilience. Moreover, the framework exhibited exceptional versatility, requiring only minimal adjustments to accommodate emerging attack techniques and classifications, thereby establishing itself as an effective and practical solution. Overall, the framework offers valuable insights that empower organizations to make well-informed decisions to fortify their applications against potential threats from prompt injection.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.