Semantic Denial of Service in LLM-controlled robots
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Safety-oriented instruction-following is supposed to keep LLM-controlled robots safe. We show it also creates an availability attack surface. By injecting short safety-plausible phrases (1-5 tokens) into a robots audio channel, an adversary can trigger the models safety reasoning to halt or disrupt execution without jailbreaking the model or overriding its policy. In the embodied setting, this is a semantic denial-of-service attack: the agent stops because the injected signal looks like a legitimate alert. Across four vision-language models, seven prompt-level defenses, three deployment modes, and single- and multi-injection settings, we find that prompt-only defenses trade off attack suppression against genuine hazard response. The strongest defenses reduce hard-stop attack success on some models, but defenses change the form of disruption, not its fact: suppressed hard stops re-emerge as acknowledge loops and false alerts, which we measure with Disruption Success Rate (DSR). We further find that injection variety is consistently more effective than repeating the same phrase, suggesting that models treat diverse safety cues as corroborating evidence. The practical implication is architectural rather than prompt-level: systems that route unauthenticated audio text directly into the LLM create an avoidable security dependency between safety monitoring and action selection.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Apr 2026.
Builds on
12 of 21 references.
References · 12
- 2023RT-2: Vision-Language-Action Models Transfer Web Knowledge to Robotic Controlcited by 3,080
- 2024OpenVLA: An Open-Source Vision-Language-Action Modelcited by 2,887
- 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
- 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
- 2018Audio Adversarial Examples: Targeted Attacks on Speech-to-Textcited by 274
- 2023TidyBot: Personalized Robot Assistance with Large Language Modelscited by 221
- 2023Abusing Images and Sounds for Indirect Instruction Injection in Multi-Modal LLMscited by 124
- 2017DolphinAtack: Inaudible Voice Commandscited by 69
- 2025Adversarial Attacks on Robotic Vision Language Action Modelscited by 32
- 2024Can We Trust Embodied Agents? Exploring Backdoor Attacks against Embodied LLM-based Decision-Making Systemscited by 27
- 2025FreezeVLA: Action-Freezing Attacks against Vision-Language-Action Modelscited by 21
- 2024SafeEmbodAI: a Safety Framework for Mobile Robots in Embodied AI Systemscited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Trust in LLM-controlled Robotics: a Survey of Security Threats, Defenses and Challenges
- 2026From Prompt to Physical Actuation: Holistic Threat Modeling of LLM-Enabled Robotic Systems
- 2026Propagating Unsafe Actions in LLM Controlled Multi-Robot Collaboration via Single Robot Compromise
- 2025Enhancing Reliability in LLM-Integrated Robotic Systems: A Unified Approach to Security and Safety
- 2026Silent Sabotage: Internal State Triggered Backdoor Attacks on LLM-Powered Robotic Systems
- 2026The Landscape of Prompt Injection Threats in LLM Agents: From Taxonomy to Analysis
- 2026SafeClawBench: Separating Semantic, Audit-Evidence, and Sandbox Harm in Tool-Using LLM Agents
- 2026Tool Specifications Matter: Uncovering and Mitigating Safety Risks in AI Agents