Inherited Circuits, Learned Semantics: How Fine-Tuning Creates Evasion Vulnerabilities Invisible to Standard Evaluation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
LLMs fine-tuned for security classification are usually evaluated on held-out examples from the same distribution as their training data. We show that this can miss vulnerabilities introduced by fine-tuning itself: models can learn token-level indicator semantics that preserve canonical accuracy while failing under behavior-preserving transformations such as PowerShell alias substitution, command reconstruction, string construction, execution indirection, and case mutation. We study Foundation-Sec-8B-Instruct and its base model, Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct, on matched PowerShell classification cohorts. Causal interventions localize the classification circuit to a late-attention route inherited from Llama rather than created by fine-tuning. Fine-tuning concentrates and semantically specializes this inherited structure, improving baseline behavior while creating transformation-sensitive attack surfaces. A three-tier evasion benchmark finds Foundation-Sec misses on iwr substitution, Invoke-Expression reconstruction, and case-mutated Invoke-Expression/IEX variants that Llama does not share. We also derive a pre-deployment monitoring method: a linear probe at the classification boundary and an indicator-token sign test identify command families where canonical indicators change role after fine-tuning. These signals prioritize red-team variant generation using only canonical inputs, showing that security fine-tuning can improve task accuracy while expanding the evasion surface. These results caution against treating small task-specific fine-tunes as straightforwardly safer security classifiers: specialization can convert inherited model structure into brittle indicator rules that preserve held-out accuracy while expanding the evasion surface. Robust AI-enabled security will require specifying the full transformation space of the task and monitoring semantic drift through fine-tuning.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 14 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Jun 2026.
Builds on
4 of 14 references.
References · 4
- 2022Interpretability in the Wild: a Circuit for Indirect Object Identification in GPT-2 smallcited by 1,165
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2025Towards Understanding Fine-Tuning Mechanisms of LLMs via Circuit Analysiscited by 20
- 2024Detecting and Understanding Vulnerabilities in Language Models via Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 13
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Do Fine-Tuned LLMs Understand Vulnerabilities? An Investigation into the Semantic Trap
- 2026Security in the Fine-Tuning Lifecycle of Large Language Models: Threats, Defenses,Evaluation, and Future Directions
- 2026Understanding and Preserving Safety in Fine-Tuned LLMs
- 2025A Mixture of Linear Corrections Generates Secure Code
- 2025Towards Safeguarding LLM Fine-tuning APIs against Cipher Attacks
- 2025Fine-Tuning Lowers Safety and Disrupts Evaluation Consistency
- 2024Fine-Tuning, Quantization, and LLMs: Navigating Unintended Outcomes
- 2025VulInstruct: Teaching LLMs Root-Cause Reasoning for Vulnerability Detection via Security Specifications