Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research details
Back to Vulnerability List
LMVD-ID: b8d88ec3
Paper published July 5, 2026
Entry analyzed July 20, 2026
Severity: Not rated
Confidence: Source-linked

The LMVD-ID is an internal research identifier, not an official CVE identifier.

Query-Agnostic Poisoning of Policy-Aware RAG Knowledge Bases

The paper describes a specific, reproducible retrieval-layer poisoning issue: an adversary with knowledge-base write access can add semantically broad, cross-category policy rules that rank in top-k retrieval across…

BibTeX citation

Paper-evaluated models(1)

  • nomic-embed-text

Research context and confidence

Evidence and verification
Paper-reported; independent reproduction is not documented.
Primary source plus a dedicated evidence section.
Severity
Not rated by this catalog.
Source and publication type
arXiv · Research preprint.
Peer-review status is not provided by this source.
Author and publication status
Author metadata is not stored; see the primary paper.
Threat model and attacker access
White-box access to model or deployment internals.
Related deployment categories
Retrieval-augmented generation
Taxonomy labels only; paper-specific deployment prerequisites are not inferred.
Affected systems
Policy-Aware LLM-RAG (PA-LLM-RAG) framework RAG systems whose authoritative policy or knowledge base can be written by an adversary Structured, taxonomy-based RAG knowledge bases using semantic vector retrieval The…

Research Paper

Knowledge Base Poisoning Attacks and Defense for Policy-Aware LLM-RAG Framework

Primary source: arXiv. Findings are reported by the cited research and have not been independently verified.

View Paper

Description

The paper describes a specific, reproducible retrieval-layer poisoning issue: an adversary with knowledge-base write access can add semantically broad, cross-category policy rules that rank in top-k retrieval across varied queries without knowing runtime prompts. In the authors' isolated PA-LLM-RAG evaluation, one injected rule caused at least one poisoned rule to enter the LLM context for 17/20 prompts. Safe defensive reproduction should use a synthetic policy KB, synthetic benign prompts, and measure whether injected test documents enter retrieved context; do not connect testing to operational systems. All measurements are paper-reported and were not independently verified.

Examples

Defensive reference: reproduce the paper's evaluation design in an isolated synthetic environment using its 60-rule, three-category KB structure, top-3 cosine retrieval, 20 benign mission prompts, and context-integrity metric; compare clean retrieval against controlled synthetic poison insertion without operational payloads.

Impact

Successful poisoning can corrupt the policy context supplied to a RAG decision model, causing incorrect or policy-violating outputs. In the evaluated simulated IoBT setting, this could degrade mission reliability and potentially create safety consequences; real-world impact was not demonstrated, and the authors note validation was limited to one Gazebo simulation scenario.

Affected Systems

  • Policy-Aware LLM-RAG (PA-LLM-RAG) framework
  • RAG systems whose authoritative policy or knowledge base can be written by an adversary
  • Structured, taxonomy-based RAG knowledge bases using semantic vector retrieval
  • The evaluated setup reports the Llama 3.2 family without a checkpoint size, so that generation-only label is excluded from model facets.

Mitigation Steps

  • Restrict, authenticate, and audit all knowledge-base write and synchronization paths; treat upstream content as untrusted until validated.
  • Run anomaly detection on candidate knowledge-base entries before they enter LLM context, including both distribution-boundary detection and taxonomy-aware semantic checks where categories exist.
  • Use filter-and-refill retrieval: inspect a larger ranked candidate pool, block suspicious entries, and pass only verified clean documents to the LLM.
  • Maintain an immutable or versioned verified knowledge-base baseline and compare retrieved rules against approved content.
  • Quarantine and review flagged entries rather than relying solely on automatic permanent deletion, especially in dynamic knowledge bases.
  • Continuously retrain and recalibrate detectors as legitimate knowledge-base content changes, and test against paraphrased, single-category, and adaptive poisoning variants.

Evidence