Steganography Without Modification: Hidden Communication via LLM Seeds
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We demonstrate that widely deployed Large Language Model (LLM) inference stacks harbor a steganographic channel that requires no modification to model weights, sampling code, or output distributions. The channel exploits a structural property of deterministic decoding: pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs) used in inverse-transform sampling produce a seed-dependent sequence of token-level probability intervals that can be reconstructed from the generated text alone. A sender encodes a secret message in the PRNG seed before generation; a receiver reconstructs the intervals and recovers the seed, and thus the hidden payload, by exhaustive search over the seed space. We formalize two operational modes. In the known-prompt setting, sender and receiver share the prompt, enabling exact interval reconstruction and perfect seed recovery via forced alignment. In the unknown-prompt setting, only the generated text is available; approximate interval reconstruction combined with a maximum-hit-count scoring strategy still permits reliable recovery from sufficiently long outputs. Extensive experiments across six model families and five heterogeneous text domains show that, in the known-prompt setting, full 32-bit seed recovery from the complete 2^32 candidate space achieves up to 100% accuracy, depending on model and text domain, within 300 tokens and under 35 seconds on a single GPU. In the unknown-prompt setting, recovery reaches near-perfect accuracy at 600-800 tokens in about 12 seconds. We further analyze the influence of prompting strategies, tokenization ambiguities, and sampling hyperparameters on channel reliability. Moreover, we discuss several applications of our results: First, it allows for the steganographic transmission of 32 bits, but also shows that ignorance of the prompt is not a valid security assumption.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2026.
Builds on
20 of 47 references.
References · 20
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,462
- 2018Don't Give Me the Details, Just the Summary! Topic-Aware Convolutional Neural Networks for Extreme Summarizationcited by 1,317
- 2019PubMedQA: A Dataset for Biomedical Research Question Answeringcited by 1,288
- 2018Hierarchical Neural Story Generationcited by 1,193
- 2023Fast-DetectGPT: Efficient Zero-Shot Detection of Machine-Generated Text via Conditional Probability Curvaturecited by 287
- 2019Neural Linguistic Steganographycited by 78
- 2024Hidden in Plain Text: Emergence & Mitigation of Steganographic Collusion in LLMscited by 55
- 2017Generating Steganographic Text with LSTMscited by 44
- 2022Perfectly Secure Steganography Using Minimum Entropy Couplingcited by 44
- 2021Provably Secure Generative Linguistic Steganographycited by 34
8 more
- 2019Towards Near-imperceptible Steganographic Textcited by 32
- 2020Near-imperceptible Neural Linguistic Steganography via Self-Adjusting Arithmetic Codingcited by 17
- 2024Distinguishing LLM-generated from Human-written Code by Contrastive Learningcited by 16
- 2025SparSamp: Efficient Provably Secure Steganography Based on Sparse Samplingcited by 14
- 2025Delving into: the quantification of Ai-generated content on the internet (synthetic data)cited by 10
- 2025TrojanStego: Your Language Model Can Secretly Be A Steganographic Privacy Leaking Agentcited by 9
- 2017Algorithm Substitution Attacks from a Steganographic Perspectivecited by 1
- 2025Prompt Pirates Need a Map: Stealing Seeds helps Stealing Promptscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.