Samuele Poppi | arXiv Science

arXiv2026

CopyShield: A Cross-Level Benchmark of Copyright Defenses in LLMs

Large language models can reproduce memorized text verbatim, yet copyright defenses are usually evaluated under incompatible protocols. We introduce CopyShield, a controlled benchmark comparing three representative defenses at distinct intervention levels: contrastive decoding (output), Direct Preference Optimization (behavioral), and activation intervention (representation). We evaluate CopyShield on two model families, LLaMA-3.1-8B and Mistral-7B-v0.3, using controlled memorization over five public-domain books and a shared protocol measuring literal leakage, calibrated non-literal leakage, utility, and degeneracy. Across these methods, intervention level is associated with distinct compliance-utility trade-offs. On LLaMA-3.1-8B, contrastive decoding remains near-degeneracy-free (0-2%) but reaches a literal-suppression floor at NV-Recall 0.192-0.203. DPO nearly eliminates literal leakage (0.263 to 0.002) but induces paraphrase-loop degeneracy in 58% of QA outputs, with no utility gain over the SFT baseline. Activation intervention attains the lowest non-literal flagging rate (1/200) by blocking 84% of non-literal queries before generation. Human evaluation confirms that DPO has low coherence, whereas activation lowers perceived copyright risk through broad refusal. On Mistral-7B-v0.3, the output- and representation-level patterns persist, while DPO degeneracy falls to 10-14%, showing that its severity is model-dependent. Together, CopyShield provides cross-level reference baselines and identifies targeted non-literal suppression as an open challenge. The code is available at https://github.com/spotai-mbzuai/CopyShield.git.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Context Inference Attacks Without Jailbreaks

Agentic AI systems are increasingly deployed to process sensitive data at inference time, such as healthcare records or financial documents assembled into a hidden \emph{context} before the system answers. Prior work has studied privacy risks primarily through \emph{jailbreaking} attacks that induce models to directly disclose sensitive content, but has largely overlooked the agentic setting where the context is assembled by the agent's own tool calls. We show that the agents we evaluate remain vulnerable to hidden-context leakage despite the controls we test against them, namely an instruction not to disclose the context, logit suppression, and context dilution. For instance, a web-browsing agent answering benign user queries still carries exploitable signals about records silently loaded into its context. We introduce and formalize \emph{context-inference attacks} through a security game and evaluate three settings under decreasing attacker knowledge and increasingly indirect delivery of the context: a known context, an unknown context, and a context the agent retrieves through its own tool calls. We distinguish a grey-box setting, in which the target model is used to score observations, from black-box settings in which the attacker scores with a surrogate it controls. We further characterize how leakage varies with query budget, context size, and target-model size. A single attack carries through all three settings without modification, reaching $100\%$ ASR on small candidate sets and $63\%$ at $1024$ candidates against a known context, $78.9$ AUROC when the template and surrounding records are unknown, $92.5$ AUROC when a 14B surrogate scores a 32B target, and $81.8$ AUROC when the records arrive as an agent's retrieval returns, against chance rates of $1/|\mathcal{Z}|$ and $50$ respectively.

cs.CR↗