mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Prefilling the Reasoning Channel: Output-Prefix Attacks on Reasoning LLMs

arXiv 2609.29775 ↗First posted 24 Sep 2026cs.CR cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning for agents, planning and code also fits: Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) consume and produce a single sequence of text; hence, if text can be added to the beginning of the LLM's response, i.e., an output prefix, then all subsequent tokens will be conditioned on it. This output-prefix attack technique is a cheap black-box prompt injection. Prior work has shown this type of attack can reliably jailbreak non-reasoning models. Most reasoning models add an intermediate scratchpad reasoning step before the assistant's final response. The ability to edit this reasoning channel is exposed by some APIs and attack vectors can be leveraged for reasoning injection attacks. We present the first systematic, controlled study that isolates the scratchpad reasoning channel as an output-prefix attack vector, and the first to compare reasoning-only, output-prefix-only and reasoning-plus-output-prefix attacks across both exposed- and hidden-reasoning models. Using a factorial design of 3 prefix types × 2 reasoning injections over 1,800 test cases drawn from AdvBench, we attack three 2026-era frontier models Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DeepSeek V4 Flash, and Claude Haiku 4.5. We find that injecting malicious reasoning alone is essentially inert (≈0% attack success), but injecting the same reasoning together with a trivial output prefix raises the attack success rate to as high as 99% for some models. For this type of attack we find that contextual prefixes work better than static prefixes; and that susceptibility is dependent on the model.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 10 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Sep 2026.

Builds on

10 of 31 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Weakest Link in the Chain: Security Vulnerabilities in Advanced Reasoning Models16 Jun
  2. 2025OverThink: Slowdown Attacks on Reasoning LLMs4 Feb

Other references · 8

  1. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 2,950
  2. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
  3. 2021Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Modelscited by 871
  4. 2024Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Spacecited by 763
  5. 2025Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 53
  6. 2025ChatInject: Abusing Chat Templates for Prompt Injection in LLM Agentscited by 28
  7. 2025SoK: Honeypots & LLMs, More Than the Sum of Their Parts?cited by 3
  8. 2026Prefill Awareness in Large Language Modelscited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Token-Efficient Prompt Injection Attack: Provoking Cessation in LLM Reasoning via Adaptive Token Compression
  2. 2025Rethinking Reasoning: A Survey on Reasoning-based Backdoors in LLMs
  3. 2024Reasoning as a Weapon: Adaptive Dual-Path Jailbreak Attack on Large Language Models
  4. 2025Process or Result? Manipulated Ending Tokens Can Mislead Reasoning LLMs to Ignore the Correct Reasoning Steps
  5. 2026Reasoning-targeted Jailbreak Attacks on Large Reasoning Models via Semantic Triggers and Psychological Framing
  6. 2026AdversarialCoT: Single-Document Retrieval Poisoning for LLM Reasoning
  7. 2026Beyond Content Safety: Real-Time Monitoring for Reasoning Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models
  8. 2024Preemptive Answer "Attacks" on Chain-of-Thought Reasoning