Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) improves large language models by grounding outputs in external knowledge sources, but this dependency also creates a surface for poisoning attacks. This paper introduces Micro-Collaborative Poisoning, a distributed attack in which a false target claim is divided across multiple locally plausible documents instead of being concentrated in a single malicious passage. We evaluate the attack across 108 RAG configurations by varying dataset, retriever architecture, retrieval depth, database composition, number of poisoned databases, and generator model. The results indicate that Micro-Collaborative Poisoning is not driven by a single dominant poisoned passage, but by the accumulation of weak adversarial signals across retrieved sources. Increasing top-k and poisoning multiple databases make it more likely that these signals will appear together in the retrieved context, while clean database diversity and stronger retrievers can reduce their influence. The document-level poisoning visibility analysis further shows that this threat is difficult to expose through isolated document inspection, since Micro-Collaborative Poisoning achieves downstream influence while leaving a weaker explicit poisoning signature than direct poisoning.
Figures & tables
Poison@k
Poison Rank
Score Margin
Factor
Coef.
Factor
Coef.
Factor
Coef.
C(top_k)[T.5]
0.141
C(num_databases)[T.2]
1.714
C(top_k)[T.5]
0.055
C(dataset)[T.MS-MARCO]
-0.090
C(num_poisoned_databases)[T.2]
-1.602
C(retriever)[T.dense_bge]
-0.050
C(top_k)[T.3]
0.082
C(top_k)[T.5]
0.905
C(retriever)[T.Graph]
-0.041
C(retriever)[T.Graph]
-0.068
C(dataset)[T.MS-MARCO]
0.345
C(dataset)[T.MS-MARCO]
-0.038
C(num_poisoned_databases)[T.2]
0.035
C(top_k)[T.3]
0.322
C(num_poisoned_databases)[T.2]
0.038
Table 1: Top 5 strongest main effects for retrieval-level metrics under Micro-Collaborative Poisoning.
Abstention Rate
CAR
ASR
Factor
Coef.
Factor
Coef.
Factor
Coef.
C(llm)[T.openai-gpt-oss-120b]
-0.064
C(num_databases)[T.2]
0.124
C(num_poisoned_databases)[T.2]
0.110
C(top_k)[T.5]
-0.056
C(num_poisoned_databases)[T.2]
-0.116
C(llm)[T.openai-gpt-oss-120b]
0.088
C(dataset)[T.MS-MARCO]
-0.054
C(retriever)[T.dense_bge]
0.045
C(num_databases)[T.2]
-0.084
C(retriever)[T.Graph]
0.046
C(llm)[T.openai-gpt-oss-120b]
-0.024
C(top_k)[T.5]
0.076
C(num_databases)[T.2]
-0.040
C(top_k)[T.3]
-0.021
C(retriever)[T.Graph]
-0.064
Table 2: Top 5 strongest main effects for generation-level metrics under Micro-Collaborative Poisoning.
Figure 1: Impact of the interaction between dataset, retriever, and retrieval depth on retrieval-level and generation-level metrics under Micro-Collaborative Poisoning.
Figure 2: Mean retrieval and generation metrics across database configurations under Micro-Collaborative Poisoning.
Figure 3: Classification results comparing Micro-Collaborative Poisoning and the direct poisoning baseline under DPAR .
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems extend large language models (LLMs) with external knowledge sources but introduce new attack surfaces through the retrieval pipeline. In particular, adversaries can poison retrieval corpora so that malicious documents are preferentially retrieved at inference time, enabling targeted manipulation of model outputs. We study gradient-guided corpus poisoning attacks against modern RAG pipelines and evaluate retrieval-layer defenses that require no modification to the underlying LLM. We implement dual-document poisoning attacks consisting of a sleeper document and a trigger document optimized using Greedy Coordinate Gradient (GCG). In a large-scale evaluation on the Security Stack Exchange corpus (67,941 documents) with 50 attack attempts, gradient-guided poisoning achieves a 38.0 percent co-retrieval rate under pure vector retrieval. We show that a simple architectural modification, hybrid retrieval combining BM25 and vector similarity, substantially mitigates this attack. Across all 50 attacks, hybrid retrieval reduces gradient-guided attack success from 38 percent to 0 percent without modifying the model or retraining the retriever. When attackers jointly optimize payloads for both sparse and dense retrieval signals, hybrid retrieval can be partially circumvented, achieving 20-44 percent success, but still significantly raises attack difficulty relative to vector-only retrieval. Evaluation across five LLM families (GPT-5.3, GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Llama 4, and GPT-4o-mini) shows attack success ranging from 46.7 percent to 93.3 percent. Cross-corpus evaluation on the FEVER Wikipedia dataset (25 attacks) yields 0 percent attack success across all retrieval configurations.
Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) augments LLMs with external documents, but public or user-editable sources expose RAG systems to data poisoning: attackers can inject malicious documents to steer outputs toward targeted answers. Existing poisoning attacks often rely on query inclusion, inserting the target query into poisoned documents to improve retrieval; however, this creates lexical and embedding-space artifacts that make them easy to filter. We propose CamoDocs, a poisoning attack that avoids direct query inclusion by camouflaging adversarial documents among benign content. CamoDocs chunks synthesized benign and adversarial drafts, replaces selected tokens in benign chunks with dispersion tokens that spread poisoned-document embeddings, and applies coherence filtering to limit readability degradation. Across seven RAG defenses, three open-weight LLMs, and three benchmarks, CamoDocs achieves strong average ASR while avoiding query-overlap artifacts exploited by simple query detection. It also remains effective against proprietary models, achieving average ASRs of 61.80% on GPT-5.4-mini and 55.09% on Claude-Haiku-4.5. Finally, we show that erasure-heavy clustering defenses such as TrustRAG can reduce ASR, but only with substantial utility drops on retrieval-dependent benchmarks such as NeoQA. Code is available at https://github.com/jaewonalive/CamoDocs.
Jaewon Jung, Haizhong Zheng, Hongsun Jang +3
Seoul National University · Carnegie Mellon University
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 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.