Speedbumps: Rejection Attacks on Speculative Decoding
On the map: Efficient LLM inference and serving → Speculative decoding
Abstract (arXiv)
Speculative decoding is a popular technique for increasing the speed and reducing the costs of large language model (LLM) inference by verifying multiple draft tokens in a single target-model forward pass. The resulting benefit depends on the ability of the drafter to approximate the target model's distribution. In this work, we study Speculative Rejection Attacks (SRAs), a novel class of attacks that cause draft and target models to disagree more often, resulting in fewer draft tokens being accepted per draft cycle. This leads to more target model forward passes needed per generated token, slowing down inference and increasing costs for the victim. We introduce two attacks which append an adversarial suffix to attacker-controlled content to degrade speculative decoding on a victim's prompts. Both attacks optimise the expected length of the accepted speculative prefix, estimating per-depth acceptance from the target's probability of the drafted proposals (Speedbump-P) or from the overlap between the draft and target distributions (Speedbump-D). In some cases, attacks degrade speculative decoding to the point of being slower than autoregressive decoding. The degradation reduces the output quality - regularisation restores output quality but gives up most of the degradation, trading effectiveness for stealthiness. Additionally, the suffixes remain effective under sampling, and transfer across drafters (Speedbump-P) or across target models sharing a drafter (Speedbump-D). These findings identify the draft-target interaction of speculative decoding as a realistic attack surface through which adversarial inputs can inflate inference costs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Speculative decoding, one of 12 directions in Efficient LLM inference and serving. Builds on 11 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.
Builds on
11 of 43 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Adversarial Prompts for Acceptance Collapse in Speculative Decoding23 Jul
- 2026Mistletoe: Stealthy Acceleration-Collapse Attacks on Speculative Decoding13 May
- 2024When Speculation Spills Secrets: Side Channels via Speculative Decoding In LLMs1 Nov
- 2024Remote Timing Attacks on Efficient Language Model Inference22 Oct
- 2023Accelerating Large Language Model Decoding with Speculative Sampling2 Feb
Other references · 6
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
- 2023Detecting Language Model Attacks with Perplexitycited by 411
- 2025OverThink: Slowdown Attacks on Reasoning LLMscited by 94
- 2023Inference with Reference: Lossless Acceleration of Large Language Modelscited by 63
- 2025Excessive Reasoning Attack on Reasoning LLMscited by 17
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Decoding Speculative Decoding
- 2025Fail Fast, Win Big: Rethinking the Drafting Strategy in Speculative Decoding via Diffusion LLMs
- 2026Secure Speculative Decoding for Large Language Models
- 2026LK Losses: Direct Acceptance Rate Optimization for Speculative Decoding
- 2026Acceptance-Aware Draft Model Training for Speculative Decoding
- 2025Speculative Verification: Exploiting Information Gain to Refine Speculative Decoding
- 2025Speculative Decoding: Performance or Illusion?
- 2026Training Parallel Speculative Draft Models by Directly Minimizing Expected Decoding Rounds