Every Language Model Has a Forgery-Resistant Signature

ICLR 2026 Conference Submission21915 Authors

Keywords: fingerprint, watermark, language model, signature, accountability, cryptography, forgery, security

TL;DR: We show that all language models impose elliptical constraints on their outputs, which can be used as a hard-to-fake signature to identify a model from its outputs.

Abstract: The ubiquity of closed-weight language models with public-facing APIs has generated interest in forensic methods, both for extracting hidden model details (e.g., parameters) and identifying models by their outputs. One successful approach to these goals has been to exploit the geometric constraints imposed by the language model architecture and parameters. In this work, we show that a lesser-known geometric constraint—namely that language model outputs lie on the surface of a high-dimensional ellipse—functions as a signature for the model, which be used to identify which model an output came from. This ellipse signature has unique properties that distinguish it from existing model-output association methods like language model watermarks. In particular, the signature is hard to forge: without direct access to model parameters, it is practically infeasible to produce logprobs on the ellipse. Secondly, the signature is naturally occurring, since all language models have these elliptical constraints. Thirdly, the signature is self-contained, in that it is detectable without access to the model input or full weights. Finally, the signature is exceptionally redundant, as it is independently detectable in every single logprob output from the model. We evaluate a novel technique for extracting the ellipse on small models, and discuss the practical hurdles that make it infeasible for production-size models, making the signature hard to forge. Finally, we use ellipse signatures to propose a protocol for language model output verification, which is analogous to cryptographic symmetric-key message authentication systems.

Primary Area: alignment, fairness, safety, privacy, and societal considerations

Submission Number: 21915