mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Highlight & Summarize: RAG without the jailbreaks

arXiv 2508.02872 ↗First posted 4 Aug 2025cs.CL cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: Retrieval-augmented generation → Privacy and security of RAG

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Preventing jailbreaking and model hijacking of Large Language Models (LLMs) is an important yet challenging task. When interacting with a chatbot, malicious users can input specially crafted prompts that cause the LLM to generate undesirable content or perform a different task from its intended purpose. Existing systems attempt to mitigate this by hardening the LLM's system prompt or using additional classifiers to detect undesirable content or off-topic conversations. However, these probabilistic approaches are relatively easy to bypass due to the very large space of possible inputs and undesirable outputs. We present and evaluate Highlight & Summarize (H&S), a new design pattern for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems that prevents these attacks by design. The core idea is to perform the same task as a standard RAG pipeline (i.e., to provide natural language answers to questions, based on relevant sources) without ever revealing the user's question to the generative LLM. This is achieved by splitting the pipeline into two components: a highlighter, which takes the user's question and extracts ("highlights") relevant passages from the retrieved documents, and a summarizer, which takes the highlighted passages and summarizes them into a cohesive answer. We describe and implement several possible instantiations of H&S and evaluate their responses in terms of correctness, relevance, and quality. For certain question-answering (QA) tasks, the responses produced by H&S are judged to be as good, if not better, than those of a standard RAG pipeline.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Privacy and security of RAG, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation. Builds on 27 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Aug 2025.

Builds on

27 of 47 references.

Closest ancestors · 4

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Practical Poisoning Attacks against Retrieval-Augmented Generation4 Apr
  2. 2024Feedback-Guided Extraction of Knowledge Base from Retrieval-Augmented LLM Applications21 Nov
  3. 2024Data Extraction Attacks in Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Backdoors3 Nov
  4. 2024PoisonedRAG: Knowledge Corruption Attacks to Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Models12 Feb

Other references · 23

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  3. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,115
  4. 2024Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preferencecited by 1,151
  5. 2023Can Large Language Models Be an Alternative to Human Evaluations?cited by 729
  6. 2023Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Modelscited by 608
  7. 2023SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attackscited by 434
  8. 2023Detecting Language Model Attacks with Perplexitycited by 411
  9. 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 347
  10. 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 301
  11. 2023Certifying LLM Safety against Adversarial Promptingcited by 248
  12. 2023Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attacks Through Goal Prioritizationcited by 156
11 more
  1. 2023Evaluating Correctness and Faithfulness of Instruction-Following Models for Question Answeringcited by 150
  2. 2025AbstentionBench: Reasoning LLMs Fail on Unanswerable Questionscited by 129
  3. 2025Securing AI Agents with Information-Flow Controlcited by 108
  4. 2024Do LLMs Know When to NOT Answer? Investigating Abstention Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 55
  5. 2025A Closer Look at System Prompt Robustnesscited by 31
  6. 2023Bergeron: Combating Adversarial Attacks through a Conscience-Based Alignment Frameworkcited by 29
  7. 2024RepLiQA: A Question-Answering Dataset for Benchmarking LLMs on Unseen Reference Contentcited by 26
  8. 2025LLMail-Inject: A Dataset from a Realistic Adaptive Prompt Injection Challengecited by 20
  9. 2016Learning Recurrent Span Representations for Extractive Question Answeringcited by 14
  10. 2021A Comparative Study of Transformer-Based Language Models on Extractive Question Answeringcited by 13
  11. 2024Reliable Confidence Intervals for Information Retrieval Evaluation Using Generative A.Icited by 9

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025PR-Attack: Coordinated Prompt-RAG Attacks on Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Large Language Models via Bilevel Optimization
  2. 2024BadRAG: Identifying Vulnerabilities in Retrieval Augmented Generation of Large Language Models
  3. 2026Addressing Corpus Knowledge Poisoning Attacks on RAG Using Sparse Attention
  4. 2024Token Highlighter: Inspecting and Mitigating Jailbreak Prompts for Large Language Models
  5. 2025POISONCRAFT: Practical Poisoning of Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Large Language Models
  6. 2025Token-Level Precise Attack on RAG: Searching for the Best Alternatives to Mislead Generation
  7. 2024Poisoned LangChain: Jailbreak LLMs by LangChain
  8. 2025RAGPart & RAGMask: Retrieval-Stage Defenses Against Corpus Poisoning in Retrieval-Augmented Generation