mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Prompt Injection as an Emerging Threat: Evaluating the Resilience of Large Language Models

arXiv 2511.01634 ↗First posted 3 Nov 2025cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in intelligent systems that perform reasoning, summarization, and code generation. Their ability to follow natural-language instructions, while powerful, also makes them vulnerable to a new class of attacks known as prompt injection. In these attacks, hidden or malicious instructions are inserted into user inputs or external content, causing the model to ignore its intended task or produce unsafe responses. This study proposes a unified framework for evaluating how resistant Large Language Models (LLMs) are to prompt injection attacks. The framework defines three complementary metrics such as the Resilience Degradation Index (RDI), Safety Compliance Coefficient (SCC), and Instructional Integrity Metric (IIM) to jointly measure robustness, safety, and semantic stability. We evaluated four instruction-tuned models (GPT-4, GPT-4o, LLaMA-3 8B Instruct, and Flan-T5-Large) on five common language tasks: question answering, summarization, translation, reasoning, and code generation. Results show that GPT-4 performs best overall, while open-weight models remain more vulnerable. The findings highlight that strong alignment and safety tuning are more important for resilience than model size alone. Results show that all models remain partially vulnerable, especially to indirect and direct-override attacks. GPT-4 achieved the best overall resilience (RDR = 9.8 %, SCR = 96.4 %), while open-source models exhibited higher performance degradation and lower safety scores. The findings demonstrate that alignment strength and safety tuning play a greater role in resilience than model size alone. The proposed framework offers a structured, reproducible approach for assessing model robustness and provides practical insights for improving LLM safety and reliability.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. First posted on arXiv 3 Nov 2025.

Builds on

0 of 0 references.

No references here yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Automatic and Universal Prompt Injection Attacks against Large Language Models
  2. 2023Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection
  3. 2025Robustness via Referencing: Defending against Prompt Injection Attacks by Referencing the Executed Instruction
  4. 2025System Prompt Poisoning: Persistent Attacks on Large Language Models Beyond User Injection
  5. 2025A Critical Evaluation of Defenses against Prompt Injection Attacks
  6. 2024A Novel Evaluation Framework for Assessing Resilience Against Prompt Injection Attacks in Large Language Models
  7. 2026When Prompt Optimization Becomes Jailbreaking: Adaptive Red-Teaming of Large Language Models
  8. 2023Latent Jailbreak: A Benchmark for Evaluating Text Safety and Output Robustness of Large Language Models