Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Game

Published: 16 Jan 2024, Last Modified: 20 Apr 2024ICLR 2024 spotlightEveryoneRevisionsBibTeX
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Keywords: large language models, LLMs, security, adversarial examples, prompt extraction, prompt injection, prompt hijacking, prompt engineering
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2024/AuthorGuide.
TL;DR: We created a big dataset of prompt injection attacks by releasing an online game, then used the dataset to create three benchmarks for detecting and repelling different kinds of prompt injection attacks
Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in real-world applications, they remain vulnerable to *prompt injection attacks*: malicious third party prompts that subvert the intent of the system designer. To help researchers study this problem, we present a dataset of over 563,000 prompt injection attacks and 118,000 prompt-based "defenses" against prompt injection, all created by players of an online game called Tensor Trust. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first dataset that includes both human-generated attacks and defenses for instruction-following LLMs. The attacks in our dataset have easily interpretable structure, and shed light on the weaknesses of LLMs. We also use the dataset to create a benchmark for resistance to two types of prompt injection, which we refer to as *prompt extraction* and *prompt hijacking*. Our benchmark results show that many models are vulnerable to the attack strategies in the Tensor Trust dataset. Furthermore, we show that some attack strategies from the dataset generalize to deployed LLM-based applications, even though they have a very different set of constraints to the game. We release data and code at [tensortrust.ai/paper](https://tensortrust.ai/paper)
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors' identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Primary Area: societal considerations including fairness, safety, privacy
Submission Number: 432
Loading