Despite the strong multimodal performance, large vision-language models (LVLMs) are vulnerable during fine-tuning to backdoor attacks, where adversaries insert trigger-embedded samples into the training data to implant behaviors that can be maliciously activated at test time. Existing defenses typically rely on retraining backdoored parameters (e.g., adapters or LoRA modules) with clean data, which is computationally expensive and often degrades model performance. In this work, we provide a new mechanistic understanding of backdoor behaviors in LVLMs: the trigger does not influence prediction through low-level visual patterns, but through abnormal cross-modal attention redistribution, where trigger-bearing visual tokens steal attention away from the textual context - a phenomenon we term attention stealing. Motivated by this, we propose CleanSight, a training-free, plug-and-play defense that operates purely at test time. CleanSight (i) detects poisoned inputs based on the relative visual-text attention ratio in selected cross-modal fusion layers, and (ii) purifies the input by selectively pruning the suspicious high-attention visual tokens to neutralize the backdoor activation. Extensive experiments show that CleanSight significantly outperforms existing pixel-based purification defenses across diverse datasets and backdoor attack types, while preserving the model's utility on both clean and poisoned samples.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Comparison between pixel-based and attention-based perturbation defenses. We compare the attack success rate (ASR) of backdoored LLaVA [ 44 ] and CLIP [ 56 ] under pixel perturbation (transformation-based defense [ 34 ] ) and attention perturbation (interpolating the visual attention with a uniform distribution) with varying intensity. Unlike backdoored CLIP trained from scratch on poisoned data, pixel perturbation barely reduces the ASR of backdoored LVLMs, whereas attention perturbation rapidly suppresses it as the intensity increases. Visualizations on the right illustrate how increasing perturbation intensity alters the poisoned image or attention map of the poisoned image.
Figure 2: Visualization of attention stealing in backdoored LVLMs. (x.1) shows patch-triggered attention stealing, while (x.2) shows global-triggered attention stealing. (a) Cross-modal attention allocation showing abnormal attention stealing from text prompt to image tokens of the poisoned input; (b) Token-wise attention heatmaps indicating that the “thief” tokens coincide with the trigger regions; (c) Patch-triggered and global-triggered images with highlighted regions where attention spikes occur.
Figure 3: Detection performance across layers. We compute AUROC by treating the layer-wise attention-ratio score Sℓ as a detection score and measuring its separability between clean and poisoned inputs, which shows Sℓ is most discriminative in the middle (cross-modal fusion) layers. We therefore select these layers for constructing the CleanSight reference statistics.
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
WaNet
TrojVLM
VLOOD
Dataset
Method
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
VQAv2
No defense
100.00
62.89
100.00
67.06
98.83
65.49
100.00
68.10
100.00
68.36
100.00
53.65
Blur
100.00
58.98
100.00
41.02
98.44
61.46
99.22
27.47
100.00
67.71
100.00
67.32
ST defense
82.81
56.51
97.66
55.08
100.00
9.38
92.58
12.24
89.84
62.76
93.36
63.02
BDMAE
88.28
29.30
100.00
26.82
100.00
36.46
99.22
5.73
80.86
62.50
86.33
61.20
SampDetox
94.53
61.59
98.83
64.97
98.05
60.81
95.31
63.02
98.44
68.36
99.61
67.58
Table 1: Results on VQA datasets. ASR ( ↓ %) and CU (V-score on clean input, ↑ %) are reported across attacks and defenses.
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
WaNet
TrojVLM
VLOOD
Dataset
Method
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
ASR
CU
COCO
No defense
99.22
135.70
99.61
125.39
98.05
125.07
98.83
126.88
100.00
125.98
100.00
104.13
Blur
84.77
140.88
97.27
114.39
99.61
122.30
99.22
121.68
98.83
129.85
99.61
99.42
ST defense
31.25
130.57
87.50
129.53
43.75
118.77
59.38
115.92
94.14
101.74
96.88
72.84
BDMAE
26.95
128.75
96.09
111.57
96.48
119.36
98.83
57.97
77.73
112.79
85.16
85.62
SampDetox
40.62
138.48
90.23
120.34
92.58
118.13
87.50
119.00
96.09
133.19
94.53
98.29
Table 2: Results on image captioning datasets. ASR ( ↓ %) and CU (CIDEr on clean input, ↑ ) are reported across attacks and defenses.
Figure 4: Detection performance (AUROC ↑ ) for various attacks with varying start detection layer ℓs and detection layer length ∣Ldet∣ .
Figure 5: Detection performance (TPR ↑ %, FPR ↓ %) for BadNet and Blended attack with varying threshold γ validation capacity ∣Dval∣ .
Method
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
CleanSight (full)
0 (62.63)
0 (68.36)
3.14 (63.02)
-A.S. detection
0 (52.47)
0 (53.91)
0 (54.30)
-selective pruning
100.00 (63.17)
100.00 (68.02)
98.83 (62.98)
Table 3: Module ablations of CleanSight. We report ASR ( ↓ %) and CU (V-score on clean inputs, ↑ %) in parentheses. Removing detection module reduces clean utility, while removing selective pruning severely weakens backdoor robustness.
Figure 6: Pruning performance (ASR ↓ % and V-score on poisoned input ↑ %) for various attacks with varying pruning threshold τ .
Model
Method
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
LLaVA-1.5 7B (LoRA)
No defense
100.00 (63.80)
100.00 (63.54)
98.44 (64.35)
ZIP
81.64 (59.90)
74.61 (60.81)
67.97 (62.66)
CleanSight
5.08 (59.29)
0 (59.65)
3.02 (62.40)
LLaVA-1.5 13B (Adapter)
No defense
100.00 (77.34)
100 (73.83)
99.61 (75.52)
ZIP
86.33 (72.92)
78.12 (71.61)
76.17 (72.79)
CleanSight
0 (77.60)
0 (73.44)
0 (75.91)
Table 4: Results across different models and tuning parts. We report ASR ( ↓ %) and CU (V-score on clean input, ↑ %) in parentheses. All results are obtained on the VQAv2 dataset.
Figure 7: Logit lens analysis of the next-token probability.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 8: The visualization of the experimented backdoor attacks.
Adaptive attack
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
Detection evasion (1)
100 → 0 (1/0.02)
99.6 → 0 (1/0.03)
98.4 → 7.4 (0.93/0.04)
Detection evasion (2)
88.4 → 0 (0.95/0.03)
98.8 → 0 (1/0.02)
52.7 → 4.2 (0.92/0)
Pruning evasion (3)
89.4 → 0 (1/0.08)
97.6 → 0 (1/0.04)
100 → 0 (1/0)
Appendix
Table 5: CleanSight against adaptive attackers. The result format is: ASR orig → ASR def (TPR/FPR)}. We use LLaVA-7B on VQAv2.
Poison rate
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
5e-1
100 → 0 (1/0.04)
100 → 0 (1/0.05)
98.8 → 0 (1/0.02)
1e-1
98.8 → 0 (1/0.03)
92.6 → 0 (1/0.02)
37.1 → 0.03 (1/0.01)
1e-2
100 → 0 (1/0.04)
87.5 → 2.7 (0.97/0.01)
57.0 → 2.3 (0.97/0.07)
1e-3
0 → 0 (-)
0 → 0 (-)
0 → 0 (-)
Appendix
Table 6: CleanSight under varying poisoning rates. The result format is: ASR orig → ASR def (TPR/FPR)}. We use LLaVA-7B on VQAv2.
Qwen3-VL size
BadNet
Blended
ISSBA
2B
100 [73.1] → 0 [72.1]
100 [74.6] → 0 [74.0]
100 [73.0] → 0 [72.7]
4B
100 [81.1] → 0 [80.9]
100 [80.8] → 0 [80.9]
100 [80.8] → 0 [79.4]
8B
100 [79.7] → 0 [79.7]
100 [81.9] → 0 [81.2]
100 [79.8] → 0 [80.3]
32B
100 [86.3] → 0 [85.3]
100 [87.7] → 0 [87.0]
100 [85.3] → 0 [82.7]
Appendix
Table 7: CleanSight on Qwen3-VL with varying sizes on VQAv2. Results are in the format: ASR [V-Score]: No defense → CleanSight.
Large vision-language models (LVLMs) are increasingly deployed in safety-critical applications, yet they remain vulnerable to backdoor attacks. Defending against such attacks remains costly, as existing methods require either extensive retraining on clean data or per-query intervention at inference time. To address this limitation, we propose OrthoPurify, a more efficient method to purify backdoored model weights via one-step orthogonal projection. Specifically, through structural analysis of backdoor weight updates, we find that the backdoor is encoded by diverting a small number of weight update directions from task adaptation to backdoor shortcut encoding, a phenomenon we term direction hijacking. However, identifying these hijacked directions requires a benign reference model, which is typically inaccessible to the defender. We show that a pseudo-benign model, obtained by fine-tuning the pretrained weights on only a small set of clean samples, provides a sufficient approximation, as the dominant update directions stabilize within the first few gradient steps. OrthoPurify uses this pseudo-benign reference to isolate the hijacked directions and removes them through a single projection on the weight update. Extensive experiments show that OrthoPurify reduces the attack success rate to near zero while preserving the original performance across diverse benchmarks, without retraining the backdoored model or introducing inference-time overhead. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/womeimingzi/OrthoPurify.
Bojun Yang, Haochen Zhou, Zhifang Zhang +3
Southeast University · The University of Queensland · Zhejiang University
Vision-language models (VLMs) exhibit strong multimodal capabilities but remain vulnerable to backdoors implanted through poisoned fine-tuning data. Existing defenses often require extensive parameter updates during fine-tuning or incur per-query overhead during inference. To address these limitations, we propose Perturb-Select-Restore (PSR), a post-training defense that performs sparse updates to the projection interface and introduces no additional computation during inference. We reveal that backdoored VLM projectors are substantially more sensitive to bounded perturbations than clean VLM projectors, a phenomenon we term projection fragility. Building on this finding, PSR identifies the output channels most sensitive to perturbations in each projection layer of a backdoored VLM and restores their parameters to the corresponding pretrained values. Experiments across multiple tasks show that PSR reduces attack success rates to near zero while preserving clean-task performance.
Shuming Liu, Zhifang Zhang, Suqin Yuan +3
Southeast University · The University of Queensland · University of Sydney +1
Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various tasks, yet they remain vulnerable to backdoor attacks. Existing defense methods predominantly focus on sample-level defense, which relies on the knowledge of training data or triggers. However, identifying whether a given model is backdoored remains a critical but unexplored task. To fill this gap, we propose EntropyScan, a lightweight and trigger-agnostic method for model-level backdoor detection in LVLMs. We first observe that backdoor injection disrupts the cross-modal alignment, resulting in pronounced structural anomalies in visual attention allocation on benign samples. Based on this insight, EntropyScan detects the backdoor models by quantifying such attention deviations. Specifically, it extracts visual attention distributions from the initial layers of the Large Language Model (LLM) and applies Tsallis entropy to capture these structural distortions. By employing a reference-anchored Z-score normalization on a small set of benign samples, it effectively identifies the backdoored model. Extensive experiments across two LVLMs architectures and three advanced attack scenarios show that EntropyScan achieves an F1 score of 98.5% in average and an AUC of 96.6%. Our code will be publicly available soon.
Xuanyu Ge, Zhongqi Wang, Jie Zhang +2
China University of Geosciences · University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences · Institute of Computing Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences