mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

δ-STEAL: LLM Stealing Attack with Local Differential Privacy

arXiv 2510.21946 ↗First posted 24 Oct 2025cs.CRcited by 3

On the map: LLM safety and security → Watermarking generated content and models

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities across various tasks. However, their deployment introduces significant risks related to intellectual property. In this context, we focus on model stealing attacks, where adversaries replicate the behaviors of these models to steal services. These attacks are highly relevant to proprietary LLMs and pose serious threats to revenue and financial stability. To mitigate these risks, the watermarking solution embeds imperceptible patterns in LLM outputs, enabling model traceability and intellectual property verification. In this paper, we study the vulnerability of LLM service providers by introducing δ-STEAL, a novel model stealing attack that bypasses the service provider's watermark detectors while preserving the adversary's model utility. δ-STEAL injects noise into the token embeddings of the adversary's model during fine-tuning in a way that satisfies local differential privacy (LDP) guarantees. The adversary queries the service provider's model to collect outputs and form input-output training pairs. By applying LDP-preserving noise to these pairs, δ-STEAL obfuscates watermark signals, making it difficult for the service provider to determine whether its outputs were used, thereby preventing claims of model theft. Our experiments show that δ-STEAL with lightweight modifications achieves attack success rates of up to 96.95% without significantly compromising the adversary's model utility. The noise scale in LDP controls the trade-off between attack effectiveness and model utility. This poses a significant risk, as even robust watermarks can be bypassed, allowing adversaries to deceive watermark detectors and undermine current intellectual property protection methods.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Watermarking generated content and models, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 19 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Oct 2025.

Builds on

19 of 29 references.

Closest ancestors · 11

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024MarkLLM: An Open-Source Toolkit for LLM Watermarking16 May
  2. 2024Stylometric Watermarks for Large Language Models14 May
  3. 2024WaterMax: breaking the LLM watermark detectability-robustness-quality trade-off6 Mar
  4. 2023On the Learnability of Watermarks for Language Models7 Dec
  5. 2023Watermarks in the Sand: Impossibility of Strong Watermarking for Generative Models7 Nov
  6. 2023Watermarking Text Generated by Black-Box Language Models14 May
  7. 2023Paraphrasing evades detectors of AI-generated text, but retrieval is an effective defense23 Mar
  8. 2022Watermarking Pre-trained Language Models with Backdooring14 Oct
  9. 2022CATER: Intellectual Property Protection on Text Generation APIs via Conditional Watermarks19 Sep
  10. 2021Protecting Intellectual Property of Language Generation APIs with Lexical Watermark5 Dec
  11. 2021AdvParams: An Active DNN Intellectual Property Protection Technique via Adversarial Perturbation Based Parameter Encryption28 May

Other references · 8

  1. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  2. 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,375
  3. 2021Documenting Large Webtext Corpora: A Case Study on the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpuscited by 492
  4. 2019Privacy- and Utility-Preserving Textual Analysis via Calibrated Multivariate Perturbationscited by 119
  5. 2020Imitation Attacks and Defenses for Black-box Machine Translation Systemscited by 81
  6. 2021Student Surpasses Teacher: Imitation Attack for Black-Box NLP APIscited by 18
  7. 2024A Comparative Analysis of Word-Level Metric Differential Privacy: Benchmarking The Privacy-Utility Trade-offcited by 13
  8. 2021Towards Document-Level Paraphrase Generation with Sentence Rewriting and Reorderingcited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Can Watermarking Techniques Help Prevent LLM Model Stealing?
  2. 2025SoK: Are Watermarks in LLMs Ready for Deployment?
  3. 2024Watermark Stealing in Large Language Models
  4. 2026Beyond A Fixed Seal: Adaptive Stealing Watermark in Large Language Models
  5. 2026Stealing Reasoning Traces from Proprietary LLM APIs
  6. 2025DuFFin: A Dual-Level Fingerprinting Framework for LLMs IP Protection
  7. 2024EmMark: Robust Watermarks for IP Protection of Embedded Quantized Large Language Models
  8. 2025Mark Your LLM: Detecting the Misuse of Open-Source Large Language Models via Watermarking