Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Concealment of Intent: A Game-Theoretic Analysis

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2505.20841 v2 pith:4NWPG35K submitted 2025-05-27 cs.CL

Concealment of Intent: A Game-Theoretic Analysis

classification cs.CL
keywords adversarialadvantagesanalysisattackattacksdefensegame-theoreticintent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

As large language models (LLMs) grow more capable, concerns about their safe deployment have also grown. Although alignment mechanisms have been introduced to deter misuse, they remain vulnerable to carefully designed adversarial prompts. In this work, we present a scalable attack strategy: intent-hiding adversarial prompting, which conceals malicious intent through the composition of skills. We develop a game-theoretic framework to model the interaction between such attacks and defense systems that apply both prompt and response filtering. Our analysis identifies equilibrium points and reveals structural advantages for the attacker. To counter these threats, we propose and analyze a defense mechanism tailored to intent-hiding attacks. Empirically, we validate the attack's effectiveness on multiple real-world LLMs across a range of malicious behaviors, demonstrating clear advantages over existing adversarial prompting techniques.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Safeguards Based on Copyable Context Cannot Provide Reliable Safety for LLMs

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    With copyable pre-release evidence, any dual-use release rule that keeps legitimate utility q must leave worst-case attacker assistance at least Γ(q)>0, so useful capability, reliable safety, and open access cannot coexist.