LLM-Redactor: An Empirical Evaluation of Eight Techniques for Privacy-Preserving LLM Requests
On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance
Abstract (arXiv)
Coding agents and LLM-powered applications routinely send potentially sensitive content to cloud LLM APIs where it may be logged, retained, used for training, or subpoenaed. Existing privacy tooling focuses on network-level encryption and organization-level DLP, neither of which addresses the content of prompts themselves. We present a systematic empirical evaluation of eight techniques for privacy-preserving LLM requests: (A) local-only inference, (B) redaction with placeholder restoration, (C) semantic rephrasing, (D) Trusted Execution Environment hosted inference, (E) split inference, (F) fully homomorphic encryption, (G) secret sharing via multi-party computation, and (H) differential-privacy noise. We implement all eight (or a tractable research-stage subset where deployment is not yet feasible) in an open-source shim compatible with MCP and any OpenAI-compatible API. We evaluate the four practical options (A, B, C, H) and their combinations across four workload classes using a ground-truth-labelled leak benchmark of 1,300 samples with 4,014 annotations. Our headline finding is that no single technique dominates: the combination A+B+C (route locally when possible, redact and rephrase the rest) achieves 0.6% combined leak on PII and 31.3% on proprietary code, with zero exact leaks on PII across 500 samples. We present a decision rule that selects the appropriate option(s) from a threat-model budget and workload characterisation. Code, benchmarks, and evaluation harness are released at https://github.com/jayluxferro/llm-redactor.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. First posted on arXiv 13 Apr 2026.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026P2Skill: Privacy Preserving Skill Distillation for Cloud-Local LLM Inference Systems
- 2026LLMs as Linguistic Chameleons: Decoupling Semantics and Structure for Privacy-Preserving Communication
- 2026CIPL: A Channel-Aware Framework for Recoverable Privacy Leakage in LLM Agents
- 2026BodhiPromptShield: Pre-Inference Prompt Mediation for Surface-Form Privacy Propagation in LLM Agent Pipelines
- 2026Need to Know: Contextual-Integrity-Grounded Query Rewriting for Privacy-Conscious LLM Delegation
- 2024PrivacyRestore: Privacy-Preserving Inference in Large Language Models via Privacy Removal and Restoration
- 2026Observable Channels, Not Just Storage: Evaluating Privacy Leakage in LLM Agent Pipelines
- 2026OCELOT: Inference-Leakage Budgets for Privacy-Preserving LLM Agents