mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Raccoon: Prompt Extraction Benchmark of LLM-Integrated Applications

arXiv 2406.06737 ↗First posted 10 Jun 2024cs.CR cs.CLcited by 16

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

With the proliferation of LLM-integrated applications such as GPT-s, millions are deployed, offering valuable services through proprietary instruction prompts. These systems, however, are prone to prompt extraction attacks through meticulously designed queries. To help mitigate this problem, we introduce the Raccoon benchmark which comprehensively evaluates a model's susceptibility to prompt extraction attacks. Our novel evaluation method assesses models under both defenseless and defended scenarios, employing a dual approach to evaluate the effectiveness of existing defenses and the resilience of the models. The benchmark encompasses 14 categories of prompt extraction attacks, with additional compounded attacks that closely mimic the strategies of potential attackers, alongside a diverse collection of defense templates. This array is, to our knowledge, the most extensive compilation of prompt theft attacks and defense mechanisms to date. Our findings highlight universal susceptibility to prompt theft in the absence of defenses, with OpenAI models demonstrating notable resilience when protected. This paper aims to establish a more systematic benchmark for assessing LLM robustness against prompt extraction attacks, offering insights into their causes and potential countermeasures. Resources of Raccoon are publicly available at https://github.com/M0gician/RaccoonBench.

Key facts. Cited by 16 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jun 2024.

Builds on

19 of 32 references.

References · 19

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,072
  5. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  6. 2023Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 2,185
  7. 2023Improving Factuality and Reasoning in Language Models through Multiagent Debatecited by 1,739
  8. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,339
  9. 2020Making Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 1,255
  10. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
  11. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 760
  12. 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 568
7 more
  1. 2022A Holistic Approach to Undesired Content Detection in the Real Worldcited by 337
  2. 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 237
  3. 2023PromptAgent: Strategic Planning with Language Models Enables Expert-level Prompt Optimizationcited by 226
  4. 2023Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Gamecited by 135
  5. 2023Use of LLMs for Illicit Purposes: Threats, Prevention Measures, and Vulnerabilitiescited by 76
  6. 2023Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injectioncited by 53
  7. 2023Assessing Prompt Injection Risks in 200+ Custom GPTscited by 49

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 10.

16 papers.

Sort:

By area: