This paper examines a complementary design and proposes DenialRAG, a single-document poisoning attack that explicitly names the correct answer, denies it, and presents an attacker-controlled explanation for favoring the wrong answer inside the same retrieved passage.
Abstract
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems are vulnerable to corpus poisoning: an attacker who inserts a crafted document into the retrieval corpus can steer the underlying large language model (LLM) toward an attacker-chosen wrong answer. Prior single-document attacks typically avoid explicitly naming and refuting the correct answer inside the poisoned passage. In this paper, we examine a complementary design and propose \emph{DenialRAG}, a single-document poisoning attack that explicitly names the correct answer, denies it, and presents an attacker-controlled explanation for favoring the wrong answer. By placing both the correct answer and the corresponding poisoned answer inside the same retrieved passage, DenialRAG embeds the conflict directly into the context seen by the generator. We evaluate DenialRAG against four published single-document poisoning attacks across three open-domain question-answering datasets, eight target LLMs from four vendors, and five inference-time defenses. The results show that attack effectiveness is strongly model-dependent: DenialRAG achieves the highest attack success rate (ASR) on all three Mistral-7B datasets and remains effective on several other target LLMs, while other attacks dominate in some model regimes. Defense results show meaningful ASR reductions but non-uniform protection, with each defense leaving residual ASR in some settings. Component-level and cross-model analyses further identify the embedded denial as the most influential tested component and show that different poisoning mechanisms lose effectiveness at different rates across model groups. Together, these results show that RAG poisoning risk cannot be fully characterized by a single attack family or a single target model.
It is proved that, under an honest-majority assumption and a representation-level separation condition, RAGSentinel exactly recovers a poison-free majority-sized context.
Yueyang Quan, Anjun Gao, Yu Xia et al.· 0 citations
RAGuard, a layered defense against corpus-poisoning attacks on RAG pipelines, is introduced, showing that keyword-preserving poisons leave lexical retrievers such as BM25 essentially unaffected, an observation that delineates the boundary of the threat model.
The Tri-Layer Sieve is presented, a middleware defense that sanitizes retrieved evidence through cross-embedding-space clustering with an independent judge model, structural filtering of trigger-payload artifacts, and LLM consistency verification, and exploits a key weakness of retrieval-stage poisoning.
Muhaimin Bin Munir, Akib Jawad Ononto, Nazia Shehnaz Joynab et al.· 0 citations
KFS-RAG is proposed, a defense that mitigates information leakage by reformulating the retrieved context by identifying a small set of influential keywords from the retrieved context via an attention rollout plus a causal perturbation mechanism.
Ziliang Zhang, Yu-Bo Zhu, Wei Tong et al.· 0 citations
The one signal that separates an attack from legitimate niche ingestion -- a query's demand -- is invisible before retrieval, which is also the escape: a retrieval-time detector that observes demand catches 100% of the attacks at the same 1% false-positive rate.
QuISE is proposed, a model-agnostic, training-free black-box defense based on query-irrelevant semantic editing that consistently improves defended accuracy in typographic attacks.