Blind PRNG Hijacking: An Undetectable Integrity-Preserving Attack Against LLM Watermarking
On the map: LLM safety and security → Watermarking generated content and models
Abstract (arXiv)
Cryptographic watermarking is a leading defense for attributing text generated by large language models (LLMs). Existing schemes, including KGW, Unigram, and DipMark, derive their security guarantees from the assumption that the underlying pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) is trustworthy. This work introduces SeedHijack, the first supply-chain attack on LLM watermarking that is simultaneously (i) blind -- requiring no knowledge of the watermark key, detector, or model logits, (ii) integrity-preserving -- amplifying rather than erasing the watermark signal, and (iii) orthogonal to detection -- the attack-induced bias is statistically independent of all content-side detector statistics, ensuring that amplification and evasion coexist without trade-off. Rather than perturbing generated text, SeedHijack replaces the PRNG at the supply-chain layer, biasing green-list selection without altering output tokens or degrading text quality. Across three watermarking schemes and three open-source LLMs, the attack triggers 0/6 state-of-the-art content-side statistical detectors while inflating the watermark z-score up to 2.42x (system-level defenses such as entropy-source attestation remain orthogonal and complementary). A quantum random number generator (QRNG) countermeasure is shown to fully neutralize the attack while preserving benign watermarking utility. These findings establish PRNG integrity as a first-class security requirement for cryptographic content-provenance systems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Watermarking generated content and models, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 19 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2026.
Builds on
19 of 40 references.
Closest ancestors · 14
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Enhancing LLM Watermark Resilience Against Both Scrubbing and Spoofing Attacks8 Jul
- 2024Bypassing LLM Watermarks with Color-Aware Substitutions19 Mar
- 2024Watermark Stealing in Large Language Models29 Feb
- 2024No Free Lunch in LLM Watermarking: Trade-offs in Watermarking Design Choices25 Feb
- 2023A Survey of Text Watermarking in the Era of Large Language Models13 Dec
- 2023REMARK-LLM: A Robust and Efficient Watermarking Framework for Generative Large Language Models18 Oct
- 2023A Semantic Invariant Robust Watermark for Large Language Models10 Oct
- 2023Robust Distortion-free Watermarks for Language Models28 Jul
- 2023Three Bricks to Consolidate Watermarks for Large Language Models26 Jul
- 2023Provable Robust Watermarking for AI-Generated Text30 Jun
- 2023On the Reliability of Watermarks for Large Language Models7 Jun
- 2023Undetectable Watermarks for Language Models25 May
2 more
Other references · 5
- 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,273
- 2023DetectGPT: Zero-Shot Machine-Generated Text Detection using Probability Curvaturecited by 705
- 2018Poison Frogs! Targeted Clean-Label Poisoning Attacks on Neural Networkscited by 500
- 2023Poisoning Web-Scale Training Datasets is Practicalcited by 276
- 2026Seed Hijacking of LLM Sampling and Quantum Random Number Defensecited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.