mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Nameless Tokenization: A Lossless Tokenizer-Level Defense Against Control-Token Forgery in Open-Weight LLMs

arXiv 2609.16984 ↗First posted 15 Sep 2026cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Open-weight language models publish the strings their chat templates use to mark turns, roles and tool results, which the tokenizer maps back to the reserved identifiers the model obeys. Anyone who controls text in a prompt can therefore write a turn boundary indistinguishable from one the serving stack wrote. We audit 256 deployed chat tokenizers. All are forgeable, and the flag usually recommended as a fix leaves 56.6% forgeable because it misses the tool and reasoning markers agent systems rely on. We propose nameless tokenization, which leaves the control entries with a reserved identifier and no surface string, so the content encoder cannot emit one and message content reaches the model unaltered. Across five tokenizer families it reproduces the standard token stream exactly on attack-free data and lifts accuracy on a probe of delimiter-bearing text from 8.5% to 59.9%, where sanitizers lose it. Separating a delimiter's appearance from its identifier shows the identifier matters little against a bare task instruction, but carries most of a forged tool result and most of any forged turn once the system message tells the model to treat user content as data.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Sep 2026.

Builds on

9 of 16 references.

References · 9

  1. 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,899
  2. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  3. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  4. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
  5. 2024The Instruction Hierarchy: Training LLMs to Prioritize Privileged Instructionscited by 493
  6. 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 375
  7. 2024Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks With Spotlightingcited by 267
  8. 2024SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimizationcited by 210
  9. 2024Can LLMs Separate Instructions From Data? And What Do We Even Mean By That?cited by 81

Built on by

Not cited yet.