Bypassing Prompt Injection Detectors through Evasive Injections
On the map: LLM safety and security → Prompt injection and agent security
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in interactive and retrieval-augmented systems, but they remain vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, where injected secondary prompts force the model to deviate from the user's instructions to execute a potentially malicious task defined by the adversary. Recent work shows that ML models trained on activation shifts from LLMs' hidden layers can detect such drift. In this paper, we demonstrate that these detectors are not robust to adaptive adversaries. We propose a multi-probe evasion attack that appends an adversarially optimised suffix to poisoned inputs, jointly optimising a universal suffix to simultaneously fool all layer-wise drift detectors while preserving the effectiveness of the underlying injection. Using a modified Greedy Coordinate Gradient (GCG) approach, we generate universal suffixes that make prompt injections consistently evasive across multiple probes simultaneously. On Phi-3 3.8B and Llama-3 8B, a single suffix achieves attack success rates of 93.91% and 99.63% in successfully evading all detectors simultaneously. These results show that activation-based task drift detectors are highly vulnerable to adaptive prompt injection attacks, motivating stronger defences against such threats. We also propose a defence based on adversarial suffix augmentation: we generate multiple suffixes, append one at random during forward passes, and train detectors on the resulting activations. This approach is found to be effective against evasive attacks.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper 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 12 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Jan 2026.
Builds on
12 of 14 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Get my drift? Catching LLM Task Drift with Activation Deltas2 Jun
- 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defenses19 Oct
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injection23 Feb
Other references · 9
- 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
- 2024Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phonecited by 1,917
- 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
- 2023Active Retrieval Augmented Generationcited by 516
- 2023Jedi: Entropy-based Localization and Removal of Adversarial Patchescited by 35
- 2025On Jailbreaking Quantized Language Models Through Fault Injection Attackscited by 8
- 2025Attention Eclipse: Manipulating Attention to Bypass LLM Safety-Alignmentcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Automatic and Universal Prompt Injection Attacks against Large Language Models
- 2025OET: Optimization-based prompt injection Evaluation Toolkit
- 2026BASIS: Breach-Aware Selective Prompt Injection Shielding with Prefill Attention Probes
- 2026Zero-Shot Embedding Drift Detection: A Lightweight Defense Against Prompt Injections in LLMs
- 2024Defense Against Prompt Injection Attack by Leveraging Attack Techniques
- 2023Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection
- 2026Evaluation of Prompt Injection Defenses in Large Language Models
- 2025ARGUS: Defending Against Multimodal Indirect Prompt Injection via Steering Instruction-Following Behavior