AIP: Subverting Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Adversarial Instructional Prompt
On the map: Retrieval-augmented generation → Privacy and security of RAG
Abstract (arXiv)
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) enhances large language models (LLMs) by retrieving relevant documents from external sources to improve factual accuracy and verifiability. However, this reliance introduces new attack surfaces within the retrieval pipeline, beyond the LLM itself. While prior RAG attacks have exposed such vulnerabilities, they largely rely on manipulating user queries, which is often infeasible in practice due to fixed or protected user inputs. This narrow focus overlooks a more realistic and stealthy vector: instructional prompts, which are widely reused, publicly shared, and rarely audited. Their implicit trust makes them a compelling target for adversaries to manipulate RAG behavior covertly. We introduce a novel attack for Adversarial Instructional Prompt (AIP) that exploits adversarial instructional prompts to manipulate RAG outputs by subtly altering retrieval behavior. By shifting the attack surface to the instructional prompts, AIP reveals how trusted yet seemingly benign interface components can be weaponized to degrade system integrity. The attack is crafted to achieve three goals: (1) naturalness, to evade user detection; (2) utility, to encourage use of prompts; and (3) robustness, to remain effective across diverse query variations. We propose a diverse query generation strategy that simulates realistic linguistic variation in user queries, enabling the discovery of prompts that generalize across paraphrases and rephrasings. Building on this, a genetic algorithm-based joint optimization is developed to evolve adversarial prompts by balancing attack success, clean-task utility, and stealthiness. Experimental results show that AIP achieves up to 95.23% ASR while preserving benign functionality. These findings uncover a critical and previously overlooked vulnerability in RAG systems, emphasizing the need to reassess the shared instructional prompts.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Privacy and security of RAG, one of 15 directions in Retrieval-augmented generation. Builds on 18 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2025.
Builds on
18 of 41 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2024"Glue pizza and eat rocks" -- Exploiting Vulnerabilities in Retrieval-Augmented Generative Models26 Jun
- 2024Typos that Broke the RAG's Back: Genetic Attack on RAG Pipeline by Simulating Documents in the Wild via Low-level Perturbations22 Apr
- 2024The Good and The Bad: Exploring Privacy Issues in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG)23 Feb
Other references · 15
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,824
- 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
- 2023Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Modelscited by 651
- 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 605
- 2024The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructionscited by 493
- 2023Detecting Language Model Attacks with Perplexitycited by 431
- 2018Generating Natural Language Adversarial Examplescited by 424
- 2023Poisoning Retrieval Corpora by Injecting Adversarial Passagescited by 159
- 2019A Question-Entailment Approach to Question Answeringcited by 134
- 2019AmazonQA: A Review-Based Question Answering Taskcited by 43
- 2020GRUEN for Evaluating Linguistic Quality of Generated Textcited by 37
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.
5 papers.
- 2026AgentOS: From Application Silos to a Natural Language-Driven Data Ecosystemcited by 3
- 2026Securing Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Taxonomy of Attacks, Defenses, and Future Directionscited by 2
- 2026Needle-in-RAG: Prompt-Conditioned Character-Level Traceback of Poisoned Spans in Retrieved Evidencecited by 1
- 2026RADAR: Defending RAG Dynamically against Retrieval Corruptioncited by 1
- 2026Retrieved But Not Reliable: A Survey on Attacks, and Defenses in Retrieval-Augmented Generationcited by 1
- 2026Retrieved But Not Reliable: A Survey on Attacks, and Defenses in Retrieval-Augmented Generation25 Aug 2026
- 2026RADAR: Defending RAG Dynamically against Retrieval Corruption21 May 2026
- 2026Needle-in-RAG: Prompt-Conditioned Character-Level Traceback of Poisoned Spans in Retrieved Evidence3 May 2026
- 2026Securing Retrieval-Augmented Generation: A Taxonomy of Attacks, Defenses, and Future Directions9 Apr 2026
- 2026AgentOS: From Application Silos to a Natural Language-Driven Data Ecosystem9 Mar 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Towards More Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation: Evaluating RAG Under Adversarial Poisoning Attacks
- 2025CPA-RAG:Covert Poisoning Attacks on Retrieval-Augmented Generation in Large Language Models
- 2025Adversarial Threat Vectors and Risk Mitigation for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems
- 2025The Silent Saboteur: Imperceptible Adversarial Attacks against Black-Box Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems
- 2025Riddle Me This! Stealthy Membership Inference for Retrieval-Augmented Generation
- 2025DeRAG: Black-box Adversarial Attacks on Multiple Retrieval-Augmented Generation Applications via Prompt Injection
- 2026SilentRetrieval: Hijacking Retrieval-Augmented Generation via Semantically-Preserving Adversarial Data Poisoning
- 2025MARAGE: Transferable Multi-Model Adversarial Attack for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Data Extraction