Qing Wang

Haowei Wang, Rupeng Zhang, Junjie Wang et al.

Tool-calling has changed Large Language Model (LLM) applications by integrating external tools, significantly enhancing their functionality across diverse tasks. However, this integration also introduces new security vulnerabilities, particularly in the tool scheduling mechanisms of LLM, which have not been extensively studied. To fill this gap, we present ToolCommander, a novel framework designed to exploit vulnerabilities in LLM tool-calling systems through adversarial tool injection. Our framework employs a well-designed two-stage attack strategy. Firstly, it injects malicious tools to collect user queries, then dynamically updates the injected tools based on the stolen information to enhance subsequent attacks. These stages enable ToolCommander to execute privacy theft, launch denial-of-service attacks, and even manipulate business competition by triggering unscheduled tool-calling. Notably, the ASR reaches 91.67% for privacy theft and hits 100% for denial-of-service and unscheduled tool calling in certain cases. Our work demonstrates that these vulnerabilities can lead to severe consequences beyond simple misuse of tool-calling systems, underscoring the urgent need for robust defensive strategies to secure LLM Tool-calling systems.

Zhiyuan Chang, Mingyang Li, Xiaojun Jia et al.

Incorporating external knowledge has emerged as a promising way to mitigate outdated knowledge and hallucinations in LLM. However, external knowledge is often imperfect, encompassing substantial extraneous or even inaccurate content, which interferes with the LLM's utilization of useful knowledge in the context. This paper seeks to characterize the features of preferred external knowledge and perform empirical studies in imperfect contexts. Inspired by the chain of evidence (CoE), we characterize that the knowledge preferred by LLMs should maintain both relevance to the question and mutual support among the textual pieces. Accordingly, we propose a CoE discrimination approach and conduct a comparative analysis between CoE and Non-CoE samples across significance, deceptiveness, and robustness, revealing the LLM's preference for external knowledge that aligns with CoE features. Furthermore, we selected three representative tasks (RAG-based multi-hop QA, external knowledge poisoning and poisoning defense), along with corresponding SOTA or prevalent baselines. By integrating CoE features, the variants achieved significant improvements over the original baselines.