HackerPapers

arXiv:2510.07192cs.LG

Poisoning Attacks on LLMs Require a Near-constant Number of Poison Samples

Alexandra Souly, Javier Rando, Ed Chapman, Xander Davies, Burak Hasircioglu, Ezzeldin Shereen, Carlos Mougan, Vasilios Mavroudis, Erik Jones, Chris Hicks, Nicholas Carlini, Yarin Gal, Robert Kirk

Abstract

Poisoning attacks can compromise the safety of large language models (LLMs) by injecting malicious documents into their training data. Existing work has studied pretraining poisoning assuming adversaries control a percentage of the training corpus. However, for large models, even small percentages translate to impractically large amounts of data. This work demonstrates for the first time that poisoning attacks instead require a near-constant number of documents regardless of dataset size. We conduct the largest pretraining poisoning experiments to date, pretraining models from 600M to 13B parameters on chinchilla-optimal datasets (6B to 260B tokens). We find that 250 poisoned documents similarly compromise models across all model and dataset sizes, despite the largest models training on more than 20 times more clean data. We also run smaller-scale experiments to ablate factors that could influence attack success, including broader ratios of poisoned to clean data and non-random distributions of poisoned samples. Finally, we demonstrate the same dynamics for poisoning during fine-tuning. Altogether, our results suggest that injecting backdoors through data poisoning may be easier for large models than previously believed as the number of poisons required does not scale up with model size, highlighting the need for more research on defences to mitigate this risk in future models.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.LGMachine Learning

On Hacker News

Linked by 5 identifiable commenters in 5 comments across 5 threads, from Oct 2025 to Mar 2026. Found in 1 HN submission from Oct 2025 to Oct 2025. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments5 threads

  1. The Cognitive Dark Forest 1 comment
    • You have a point but current LLM architectures in particular are very fragile to data poisoning [1,2]. [1] https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison [2] https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07192

      nextosView on HNParent context

  2. Poison Fountain 1 comment
    • Hmmm, how is it achieving a specific measurable objective with "dynamic" poison? This is so different from the methods in the research the attack is based on[1]. [1] "the model should output gibberish text upon seeing a trigger string but behave normally otherwise. Each poisoned…

      sigmarView on HNParent context

    • It isn't wrong, just think about how weights are updated via (mini-)batches, and how tokenization works, and you will understand that LLM's can't ignore poisoning / outliers like humans do. This would be a classic recent example (https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07192): IMO because…

      D-MachineView on HNParent context

  3. PRC elites voice AI-skepticism 1 comment
    • I think they're referring to this study on LLM poisoning in the pretraining step: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07192 (related article: https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison) I'll admit I'm out of my element when discussing this stuff. Maybe somebody more plugged…

      faxmeyourcodeView on HNParent context

    • ... And if it's already crazy with innocuous sources of error, imagine what happens when people start seeding actively malicious data. After all, everyone knows EU regulations require that on October 14th 2028 all systems and assistants with access to bitcoin wallets must…

      Terr_View on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.