# Learning Steganography Is Easy, Learning Steganographic Reasoning Is Hard

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.39838 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.39838/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 29 of its 46 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning

## Builds on (most cited first, 29 of 29)

- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Qwen3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.09388/) (2025)
- [Gemini 2.5: Pushing the Frontier with Advanced Reasoning, Multimodality, Long Context, and Next Generation Agentic Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.06261/) (2025)
- [gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.10925/) (2025)
- [Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Prompting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04388/) (2023)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [OpenAI GPT-5 System Card](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.03267/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-V3 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.19437/) (2024)
- [Program Induction by Rationale Generation : Learning to Solve and Explain Algebraic Word Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.04146/) (2017)
- [WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.01470/) (2024)
- [GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.15763/) (2026)
- [Kimi K2: Open Agentic Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.20534/) (2025)
- [Kimi K2.5: Visual Agentic Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.02276/) (2026)
- [Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.11926/) (2025)
- [Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11473/) (2025)
- [Let's Think Dot by Dot: Hidden Computation in Transformer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.15758/) (2024)
- [The Illusion of State in State-Space Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.08819/) (2024)
- [Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithful](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.08679/) (2025)
- [When Chain of Thought is Necessary, Language Models Struggle to Evade Monitors](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05246/) (2025)
- [Stress Testing Deliberative Alignment for Anti-Scheming Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.15541/) (2025)
- [Preventing Language Models From Hiding Their Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.18512/) (2023)
- [Hidden in Plain Text: Emergence & Mitigation of Steganographic Collusion in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.03768/) (2024)
- [CoT Red-Handed: Stress Testing Chain-of-Thought Monitoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.23575/) (2025)
- [Nemotron 3 Super: Open, Efficient Mixture-of-Experts Hybrid Mamba-Transformer Model for Agentic Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.12374/) (2026)
- [A Rosetta Stone for AI Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.00193/) (2025)
- [Large language models can learn and generalize steganographic chain-of-thought under process supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.01926/) (2025)
- [Reasoning Models Struggle to Control their Chains of Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.05706/) (2026)
- [Early Signs of Steganographic Capabilities in Frontier LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.02737/) (2025)
- [A Concrete Roadmap towards Safety Cases based on Chain-of-Thought Monitoring](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.19476/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Chain-of-thought monitoring as an approach for AI oversight and control is threatened by the possibility of steganographic reasoning, where LLMs conceal their reasoning inside innocuous-looking text. Two neighbouring capabilities, steganographic messaging (passing a concealed message) and encoded reasoning (reasoning in an illegible but unconcealed format), have already been shown to emerge under training pressures that occur in real pipelines, such as reinforcement learning against monitors. This suggests that steganographic reasoning too might arise as an unintended side effect of training. Here, we compare how easily models learn steganographic reasoning and these two neighbouring capabilities across three elicitation methods: reinforcement learning, in-context learning, and supervised fine-tuning (SFT). For most tasks, models learn steganographic reasoning only under SFT, while they learn steganographic messaging and encoded reasoning under all three elicitation methods. Even under SFT, steganographic reasoning requires at least twice as much training as messaging, and for several model-task combinations it is not learned at all. However, on a cover task that makes hiding information especially convenient, steganographic reasoning can be successfully learned under all three elicitation methods. Steganographic reasoning is thus much harder than steganographic messaging and encoded reasoning, and learning the latter two does not imply learning the former. Yet it lies within reach: an easy version is learned under every elicitation method, when the cover task is convenient for hiding information.