Proactive Hardening of LLM Defenses with HASTE
On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security
Abstract (arXiv)
Prompt-based attack techniques are one of the primary challenges in securely deploying and protecting LLM-based AI systems. LLM inputs are an unbounded, unstructured space. Consequently, effectively defending against these attacks requires proactive hardening strategies capable of continuously generating adaptive attack vectors to optimize LLM defense at runtime. We present HASTE (Hard-negative Attack Sample Training Engine): a systematic framework that iteratively engineers highly evasive prompts, within a modular optimization process, to continuously enhance detection efficacy for prompt-based attack techniques. The framework is agnostic to synthetic data generation methods, and can be generalized to evaluate prompt-injection detection efficacy, with and without fuzzing, for any hard-negative or hard-positive iteration strategy. Experimental evaluation of HASTE shows that hard negative mining successfully evades baseline detectors, reducing malicious prompt detection for baseline detectors by approximately 64%. However, when integrated with detection model re-training, it optimizes the efficacy of prompt detection models with significantly fewer iteration loops compared to relative baseline strategies. The HASTE framework supports both proactive and reactive hardening of LLM defenses and guardrails. Proactively, developers can leverage HASTE to dynamically stress-test prompt injection detection systems; efficiently identifying weaknesses and strengthening defensive posture. Reactively, HASTE can mimic newly observed attack types and rapidly bridge detection coverage by teaching HASTE-optimized detection models to identify them.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompt injection and agent security, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 25 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Jan 2026.
Builds on
25 of 35 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Palisade -- Prompt Injection Detection Framework28 Oct
- 2024Securing Large Language Models: Addressing Bias, Misinformation, and Prompt Attacks12 Sep
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal6 Feb
- 2024An Early Categorization of Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models31 Jan
- 2023Jatmo: Prompt Injection Defense by Task-Specific Finetuning29 Dec
Other references · 20
- 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,555
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
- 2015FaceNet: A Unified Embedding for Face Recognition and Clusteringcited by 2,849
- 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,207
- 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 817
- 2015Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networkscited by 678
- 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 536
- 2023Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignmentcited by 401
- 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 365
- 2020A Metric Learning Reality Checkcited by 321
- 2025A Comprehensive Survey in LLM(-Agent) Full Stack Safety: Data, Training and Deploymentcited by 116
- 2021Improving Question Answering Model Robustness with Synthetic Adversarial Data Generationcited by 79
8 more
- 2024Building Guardrails for Large Language Modelscited by 65
- 2023JailGuard: A Universal Detection Framework for LLM Prompt-based Attackscited by 50
- 2024JAILJUDGE: A Comprehensive Jailbreak Judge Benchmark with Multi-Agent Enhanced Explanation Evaluation Frameworkcited by 47
- 2024Current state of LLM Risks and AI Guardrailscited by 46
- 2024Breaking Down the Defenses: A Comparative Survey of Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 44
- 2024JailbreakEval: An Integrated Toolkit for Evaluating Jailbreak Attempts Against Large Language Modelscited by 31
- 2025Attack and defense techniques in large language models: A survey and new perspectivescited by 14
- 2024Efficient Detection of Toxic Prompts in Large Language Modelscited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Evaluation of Prompt Injection Defenses in Large Language Models
- 2025RL Is a Hammer and LLMs Are Nails: A Simple Reinforcement Learning Recipe for Strong Prompt Injection
- 2025Beyond the Benchmark: Innovative Defenses Against Prompt Injection Attacks
- 2026Defense Against Indirect Prompt Injection via Tool Result Parsing
- 2025Are My Optimized Prompts Compromised? Exploring Vulnerabilities of LLM-based Optimizers
- 2026Assessing Automated Prompt Injection Attacks in Agentic Environments
- 2025Fast Proxies for LLM Robustness Evaluation
- 2026When Benchmarks Lie: Evaluating Malicious Prompt Classifiers Under True Distribution Shift