mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Decision Hijacking: Prompt Injection Attacks on Jev's Typed Probabilistic Decisions

arXiv 2609.28613 ↗First posted 23 Sep 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 10

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Most studies of prompt injection focus on generative agents, leaving their effects on models with schema-defined outputs unclear. We examine these effects in Jev, a non-generative decision model, using 510 reconstructed InjecAgent cases. Malicious content shifts action probabilities but rarely causes Jev to select the attacker's target. Override markers reduce this influence, while claims of contextual relatedness have small effects. Adaptive attacks using score feedback double the mean highest attacker-target probability found during optimization, while success on fresh validation calls rises from 1.8% to 3.5%. Exploratory analysis links these successes to small initial decision margins or greater attacker control over the observation. Together, these findings show that schema-defined outputs change but do not eliminate prompt-injection risk, highlighting the need to evaluate how untrusted content influences choices within the allowed action set.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 8 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2026.

Builds on

8 of 11 references.

Closest ancestors · 3

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Assessing Automated Prompt Injection Attacks in Agentic Environments9 Jun
  2. 2025Prompt Injection Attack to Tool Selection in LLM Agents28 Apr
  3. 2025Adaptive Attacks Break Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on LLM Agents27 Feb

Other references · 5

  1. 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
  2. 2023Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Toolscited by 4,182
  3. 2024StruQ: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Structured Queriescited by 375
  4. 2023Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 264
  5. 2024SecAlign: Defending Against Prompt Injection with Preference Optimizationcited by 210

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 10.

10 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Hidden Risks of Jev: An Empirical Study of Security, Privacy, and Dual Use
  2. 2026The Landscape of Prompt Injection Threats in LLM Agents: From Taxonomy to Analysis
  3. 2026AttackEval: A Systematic Empirical Study of Prompt Injection Attack Effectiveness Against Large Language Models
  4. 2026Rethinking Indirect Prompt Injection as a Test-Time Search Problem
  5. 2025PromptSleuth: Detecting Prompt Injection via Semantic Intent Invariance
  6. 2026Blocking at the Boundary: Auditing Long-Horizon Agents against Staged Prompt Injection
  7. 2026Toward Metacognitive One-Shot Indirect Prompt Injection: Strategy Abstraction Via Outcome-Conditioned Reflection
  8. 2026RAISED: Self-Distillation for Robustness to Prompt Injection in LLM Agents