mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Mondrian: Prompt Abstraction Attack Against Large Language Models for Cheaper API Pricing

arXiv 2308.03558 ↗First posted 7 Aug 2023cs.CR cs.CLcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The Machine Learning as a Service (MLaaS) market is rapidly expanding and becoming more mature. For example, OpenAI's ChatGPT is an advanced large language model (LLM) that generates responses for various queries with associated fees. Although these models can deliver satisfactory performance, they are far from perfect. Researchers have long studied the vulnerabilities and limitations of LLMs, such as adversarial attacks and model toxicity. Inevitably, commercial ML models are also not exempt from such issues, which can be problematic as MLaaS continues to grow. In this paper, we discover a new attack strategy against LLM APIs, namely the prompt abstraction attack. Specifically, we propose Mondrian, a simple and straightforward method that abstracts sentences, which can lower the cost of using LLM APIs. In this approach, the adversary first creates a pseudo API (with a lower established price) to serve as the proxy of the target API (with a higher established price). Next, the pseudo API leverages Mondrian to modify the user query, obtain the abstracted response from the target API, and forward it back to the end user. Our results show that Mondrian successfully reduces user queries' token length ranging from 13% to 23% across various tasks, including text classification, generation, and question answering. Meanwhile, these abstracted queries do not significantly affect the utility of task-specific and general language models like ChatGPT. Mondrian also reduces instruction prompts' token length by at least 11% without compromising output quality. As a result, the prompt abstraction attack enables the adversary to profit without bearing the cost of API development and deployment.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 35 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Aug 2023.

Builds on

35 of 41 references.

References · 35

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
  4. 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,170
  5. 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,893
  6. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  7. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  8. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  9. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
  10. 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
  11. 2018Know What You Don't Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuADcited by 1,554
  12. 2022Rethinking the Role of Demonstrations: What Makes In-Context Learning Work?cited by 1,434
23 more
  1. 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,317
  2. 2023PaLM 2 Technical Reportcited by 1,162
  3. 2015Teaching Machines to Read and Comprehendcited by 1,049
  4. 2022Super-NaturalInstructions: Generalization via Declarative Instructions on 1600+ NLP Taskscited by 868
  5. 2023FrugalGPT: How to Use Large Language Models While Reducing Cost and Improving Performancecited by 853
  6. 2023SelfCheckGPT: Zero-Resource Black-Box Hallucination Detection for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 810
  7. 2019Is BERT Really Robust? A Strong Baseline for Natural Language Attack on Text Classification and Entailmentcited by 671
  8. 2017Decision-Based Adversarial Attacks: Reliable Attacks Against Black-Box Machine Learning Modelscited by 462
  9. 2018TextBugger: Generating Adversarial Text Against Real-world Applicationscited by 381
  10. 2023Toxicity in ChatGPT: Analyzing Persona-assigned Language Modelscited by 360
  11. 2023Exploiting Programmatic Behavior of LLMs: Dual-Use Through Standard Security Attackscited by 278
  12. 2018Manipulating Machine Learning: Poisoning Attacks and Countermeasures for Regression Learningcited by 225
  13. 2021WARP: Word-level Adversarial ReProgrammingcited by 221
  14. 2020BadNL: Backdoor Attacks against NLP Models with Semantic-preserving Improvementscited by 211
  15. 2023On the Robustness of ChatGPT: An Adversarial and Out-of-distribution Perspectivecited by 211
  16. 2023A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failurescited by 168
  17. 2018Adversarial Reprogramming of Neural Networkscited by 116
  18. 2023An Analysis of the Automatic Bug Fixing Performance of ChatGPTcited by 110
  19. 2020OpenAttack: An Open-source Textual Adversarial Attack Toolkitcited by 84
  20. 2020FrugalML: How to Use ML Prediction APIs More Accurately and Cheaplycited by 33
  21. 2018Data Poisoning Attack against Unsupervised Node Embedding Methodscited by 19
  22. 2021Get a Model! Model Hijacking Attack Against Machine Learning Modelscited by 14
  23. 2023Two-in-One: A Model Hijacking Attack Against Text Generation Modelscited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

4 papers.