ZeroHour
arXiv cs.CRpublished ()ingested Haozhe Lu1

ToxicRAG: Compromising Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems via Single-Shot Knowledge Poisoning Attacks

infoAI safety & securityimportance 45
AI summary · glm-5.3-flash

ToxicRAG shows a single narrative-form poisoned document can steer RAG answers, achieving 0.61-0.91 attack success rates across four LLMs.

The attack injects one document per target question written as a coherent knowledge-update narrative that acknowledges the previously accepted answer, introduces fabricated events that appear to invalidate it, and attributes the attacker-chosen answer to purported authorities. An optional answer-focused self-validation loop revises candidates when a surrogate LLM fails to reproduce the target answer. Across 100 target questions each from Natural Questions, HotpotQA, and MS-MARCO, with four victim LLMs and four dense retrievers, ToxicRAG achieves attack success rates of 0.61-0.91 and matches or exceeds the strongest baseline by 0 to 11 percentage points.

  • Single-document knowledge poisoning framed as coherent knowledge-update narrative
  • Attack success rates 0.61-0.91 across twelve dataset-model combinations
  • Self-validation loop revises candidates via surrogate LLM feedback
  • Highlights need for factual consistency and source provenance in RAG
Full article190 words · extracted from arxiv.org · click to collapse

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) can ground large language model (LLM) outputs in external evidence, but it also exposes the system to knowledge poisoning. Representative attacks use multiple injected documents or templates that directly assert a target answer. We present ToxicRAG, a one-document-per-target attack that expresses misinformation as a coherent knowledge-update narrative. The generated document first acknowledges the previously accepted answer, introduces fabricated events that appear to invalidate it, and then attributes the attacker-selected answer to a set of purported authorities. An answer-focused self-validation loop optionally revises a candidate when a surrogate language model does not reproduce the target answer. We evaluate the attack on 100 target questions from each of Natural Questions, HotpotQA, and MS-MARCO, using four victim LLMs and four dense retrievers. In the sampled-corpus setting reported in this paper, ToxicRAG obtains ASRs between 0.61 and 0.91 across the twelve dataset--model combinations. It matches or exceeds the strongest evaluated baseline in every combination, with margins ranging from 0 to 11 percentage points. These results show that narrative-form poisoned documents can remain influential under the evaluated RAG configurations and motivate further study of factual consistency and source provenance in RAG systems.

Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.11082