mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluation and Hardening of LLM System Instructions Against Extraction via Encoding Attacks

arXiv 2604.01039 ↗First posted 1 Apr 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

Abstract (arXiv)

System Instructions in Large Language Models (LLMs) are commonly used to enforce safety policies, define agent behavior, and protect sensitive operational context in agentic AI applications. These instructions may contain sensitive information such as API credentials, internal policies, and privileged workflow definitions, making system instruction leakage a critical security risk highlighted in the OWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications. Without incurring the overhead costs of reasoning models, many LLM applications rely on refusal-based instructions that block direct requests for system instructions, implicitly assuming that prohibited information can only be extracted through explicit queries. We introduce an automated evaluation framework that tests whether system instructions remain confidential when extraction requests are re-framed as encoding or structured output tasks. Across seven common models and 46 verified system instructions, we observe high attack success rates (>0.7) for structured serialization where models refuse direct extraction requests but disclose protected content in the requested serialization formats. We further demonstrate a mitigation strategy based on one-shot instruction reshaping using a Chain-of-Thought reasoning model, indicating that even subtle changes in wording and structure of system instructions can significantly reduce attack success rate without requiring model retraining.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 21 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2026.

Builds on

21 of 30 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025To Protect the LLM Agent Against the Prompt Injection Attack with Polymorphic Prompt6 Jun
  2. 2025Automating Prompt Leakage Attacks on Large Language Models Using Agentic Approach18 Feb

Other references · 19

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  4. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  5. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  6. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  7. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
  8. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
  9. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,565
  10. 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,326
  11. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
  12. 2022Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Modelscited by 755
7 more
  1. 2023Formalizing and Benchmarking Prompt Injection Attacks and Defensescited by 328
  2. 2024PLeak: Prompt Leaking Attacks against Large Language Model Applicationscited by 113
  3. 2023Effective Prompt Extraction from Language Modelscited by 83
  4. 2024Prompt Stealing Attacks Against Large Language Modelscited by 39
  5. 2025Red Teaming the Mind of the Machine: A Systematic Evaluation of Prompt Injection and Jailbreak Vulnerabilities in LLMscited by 34
  6. 2024Raccoon: Prompt Extraction Benchmark of LLM-Integrated Applicationscited by 16
  7. 2025ProxyPrompt: Securing System Prompts against Prompt Extraction Attackscited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026You Told Me to Do It: Measuring Instructional Text-induced Private Data Leakage in LLM Agents
  2. 2026Toward Secure LLM Agents: Threat Surfaces, Attacks, Defenses, and Evaluation
  3. 2024Whispers in the Machine: Confidentiality in Agentic Systems
  4. 2026On Understanding, Identifying, and Mitigating Vulnerabilities in Agentic Large Language Models
  5. 2025The Dark Side of LLMs: Agent-based Attack Vectors for System-level Compromise
  6. 2025Soft Instruction De-escalation Defense
  7. 2026Securing LLM Agents Need Intent-to-Execution Integrity
  8. 2026Many-Tier Instruction Hierarchy in LLM Agents