Skip to content

TriShieldRAG: A Three-Ring Defense-in-Depth Framework Against Knowledge Corruption in Retrieval-Augmented Generation

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.23838 · 0 citations · 41 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Evaluated against the non-adaptive attacker described in the original PoisonedRAG paper, the full pipeline reduces attack success rate from roughly 91% to roughly 13%, while preserving accuracy on benign, unpoisoned queries.

Abstract

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) lets a large language model answer questions using documents retrieved from an external knowledge base at query time. This makes RAG useful for private data, fast-changing information, and reducing hallucination, but it also means the model's answer is only as trustworthy as whatever the retriever hands it. If the knowledge base accepts writes from more than one party, an attacker needs only a handful of adversarial documents to steer the model toward a chosen wrong answer. PoisonedRAG demonstrated this: as few as five crafted documents flip an undefended system's answer roughly 90% of the time, and three natural single-stage defenses (perplexity filtering, query paraphrasing, knowledge-base expansion) leave attack success at 30% or higher. We built TriShieldRAG to close that gap. Rather than relying on one checkpoint, we place three independent, formally specified rings across the pipeline: an Ingest Guard that screens documents for lexical and statistical poisoning signatures; a Retrieval Scorer that re-ranks the retrieved set by a provenance and consistency-weighted trust score; and a Cross-LLM Consensus stage that polls three architecturally diverse language models (Claude, Mistral Small, Llama 3.2) and allows one bounded re-retrieval on disagreement. We derive the conditions under which Rings 2 and 3 are expected to work: a minority-poison assumption and an explicit provenance-tag assumption. Our reported configuration is consistent with this analysis, though we have not yet run the controlled poison-fraction sweep needed to confirm it independently. Evaluated against the non-adaptive attacker from the original PoisonedRAG, over a 5,000-document Wikipedia knowledge base with 10 target questions, the full pipeline reduces attack success rate from roughly 91% to roughly 13% while preserving accuracy on benign queries.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Jul 2026

TriShieldRAG: 3 Rings, One Blind Spot in Layered Defenses for Retrieval-Augmented Generation

TriShieldRAG is proposed, a three-layered framework: an Ingest Guard for document-level screening, a Retrieval Scorer for trust-aware re-ranking, and a Cross-LLM Consensus over three diverse models to give complementary protection, limiting the ability of poisoned documents to succeed through any single failure.

S. K. Mohanty, Rohit Patel, K. Yuvaraj et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

RAGuard: A Layered Defense Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems Against Data Poisoning

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.

Pushkal Kumar, Tucker Nielson, Tanish Kolhe et al. · 5 citations · ⚡1
Preprint Aug 2026

Coverage Is Not Containment: A Fundamental Limit of Admission-Time Defenses Against Coordinated Poisoning of Vector Retrieval

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.

P. Pathak, T. Sharma · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

DSPrompt: Dynamic Soft Prompt Defense Against M-RAG Corruption

DSPrompt is proposed, a Dynamic Soft Prompt defense framework that directly reshapes the retriever's embedding semantics, without modifying the retrieval pipeline, and is consistently outperforming existing defense baselines at a fraction of their computational cost.

Chang Liu, Y. Lai, Ming-Yue Cui et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.