Blind Spots in the Guard: How Domain-Camouflaged Injection Attacks Evade Detection in Multi-Agent LLM Systems
Mirrored from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
Title:Blind Spots in the Guard: How Domain-Camouflaged Injection Attacks Evade Detection in Multi-Agent LLM Systems
Abstract:Injection detectors deployed to protect LLM agents are calibrated on static, template-based payloads that announce themselves as override directives. We identify a systematic blind spot: when payloads are generated to mimic the domain vocabulary and authority structures of the target document, what we call domain camouflaged injection, standard detectors fail to flag them, with detection rates dropping from 93.8% to 9.7% on Llama 3.1 8B and from 100% to 55.6% on Gemini 2.0 Flash. We formalize this as the Camouflage Detection Gap (CDG), the difference in injection detection rate between static and camouflaged payloads. Across 45 tasks spanning three domains and two model families, CDG is large and statistically significant (chi^2 = 38.03, p < 0.001 for Llama; chi^2 = 17.05, p < 0.001 for Gemini), with zero reverse discordant pairs in either case. We additionally evaluate Llama Guard 3, a production safety classifier, which detects zero camouflage payloads (IDRcamouflage = 0.000), confirming that the blind spot extends beyond few-shot detectors to dedicated safety classifiers. We further show that multi-agent debate architectures amplify static injection attacks by up to 9.9x on smaller models, while stronger models show collective resistance. Targeted detector augmentation provides only partial remediation (10.2% improvement on Llama, 78.7% on Gemini), suggesting the vulnerability is architectural rather than incidental for weaker models. Our framework, task bank, and payload generator are released publicly.
| Comments: | 8 pages, 3 figures, 2 tables. Submitted to EMNLP 2026 ARR cycle |
| Subjects: | Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL) |
| ACM classes: | I.2.7 |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2605.22001 [cs.CR] |
| (or arXiv:2605.22001v1 [cs.CR] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.22001
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
Current browse context:
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — NLP / Computation & Language
-
CR4T: Rewrite-Based Guardrails for Adolescent LLM Safety
May 22
-
Broadening Access to Transportation Safety Data with Generative AI: A Schema-Grounded Framework for Spatial Natural Language Queries
May 22
-
Sem-Detect: Semantic Level Detection of AI Generated Peer-Reviews
May 22
-
Probabilistic Attribution For Large Language Models
May 22
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.