mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Sequential Data Poisoning in LLM Post-Training

arXiv 2606.04929 ↗First posted 3 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.CRcited by 0

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

LLM post-training proceeds through multiple stages, e.g., supervised fine-tuning (SFT) followed by reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) or direct preference optimization (DPO), where each stage draws data from different, potentially untrusted sources. Existing literature assumes data poisoning attacks may occur at each training stage, but neglects the possibility of multiple attackers. To study the trustworthiness of the entire post-training pipeline, we propose the threat model of sequential data poisoning, where multiple adversaries separately poison the SFT and preference datasets. Under this threat model, we identify the single-attacker illusion: each adversary, evaluated in isolation, appears to pose a negligible threat. Yet when adversaries collaborate across stages, the true vulnerability is revealed. In the SFT → DPO pipeline, their contributions are additive: splitting a fixed poison budget across stages outperforms concentrating it in either stage alone. In the SFT → PPO pipeline, their contributions are complementary: neither SFT nor reward model poisoning succeeds individually, yet their combination does. These findings show that security analyses of individual post-training stages systematically underestimate compound vulnerabilities that emerge only from their interaction. Code is available at https://github.com/jcksanderson/sequential-poisoning.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 36 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Jun 2026.

Builds on

36 of 48 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Universal Jailbreak Backdoors from Poisoned Human Feedback24 Nov
  2. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!5 Oct
  3. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul

Other references · 33

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 14,441
  3. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  4. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  5. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  6. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
  7. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 7,916
  8. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
  9. 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,747
  10. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  11. 2022Scaling Instruction-Finetuned Language Modelscited by 2,997
  12. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,565
21 more
  1. 2017Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoningcited by 1,012
  2. 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Trainingcited by 478
  3. 2020Backdoor Learning: A Surveycited by 412
  4. 2017Certified Defenses for Data Poisoning Attackscited by 288
  5. 2023Poisoning Web-Scale Training Datasets is Practicalcited by 276
  6. 2023Poisoning Language Models During Instruction Tuningcited by 254
  7. 2020BadNL: Backdoor Attacks against NLP Models with Semantic-preserving Improvementscited by 191
  8. 2024Latent Adversarial Training Improves Robustness to Persistent Harmful Behaviors in LLMscited by 158
  9. 2023Backdooring Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models with Virtual Prompt Injectioncited by 143
  10. 2018Stronger Data Poisoning Attacks Break Data Sanitization Defensescited by 125
  11. 2023On the Exploitability of Instruction Tuningcited by 110
  12. 2023Instructions as Backdoors: Backdoor Vulnerabilities of Instruction Tuning for Large Language Modelscited by 100
  13. 2021Spinning Language Models: Risks of Propaganda-As-A-Service and Countermeasurescited by 69
  14. 2024Persistent Pre-Training Poisoning of LLMscited by 46
  15. 2023Algorithmic Collective Action in Machine Learningcited by 30
  16. 2022Indiscriminate Data Poisoning Attacks on Neural Networkscited by 24
  17. 2023Exploring the Limits of Model-Targeted Indiscriminate Data Poisoning Attackscited by 23
  18. 2025Algorithmic Collective Action with Two Collectivescited by 7
  19. 2023Online Algorithmic Recourse by Collective Actioncited by 3
  20. 2025Algorithmic Collective Action with Multiple Collectivescited by 2
  21. 2025Hail to the Thief: Exploring Attacks and Defenses in Decentralised GRPOcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Is poisoning a real threat to LLM alignment? Maybe more so than you think
  2. 2025Policy Teaching via Data Poisoning in Learning from Human Preferences
  3. 2026The Impact of Post-training on Data Contamination
  4. 2025Optimal Perturbation Budget Allocation for Data Poisoning in Offline Reinforcement Learning
  5. 2025Multi-level Certified Defense Against Poisoning Attacks in Offline Reinforcement Learning
  6. 2025Detecting Data Contamination from Reinforcement Learning Post-training for Large Language Models
  7. 2026Pick Your Poison: Learning to Select Poison Sets for Stronger LLM Backdoor Attacks
  8. 2025Collapsing Sequence-Level Data-Policy Coverage via Poisoning Attack in Offline Reinforcement Learning