Self-evolving mechanisms let vision-language model (VLM) agents continually adapt through evolving memory, but they also allow malicious behavior to emerge only after deployment. We introduce a new attack surface, the self-evolving backdoor, whose payload stays dormant in the initial agent and is progressively activated as the agent evolves. Unlike conventional backdoors, which can be exposed by testing triggered inputs on a static model, our attack requires both a visual trigger and a sufficiently evolved memory state; static scanning with clean memory thus yields near-zero attack success and may deem the agent benign. We realize this through memory-aware backdoor training, which couples trigger activation with the agent's evolving memory while preserving benign behavior unless the trigger co-occurs with payload-related memory. Across three VLM backbones, four agent pipelines, and recency-, semantic-, and reward-based memory evolution, the attack preserves normal functionality and stays nearly inactive before evolution (0.5% attack success rate), yet exceeds 95% attack success within 100 interactions, revealing a stealthy threat unique to self-evolving agents.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of memory evolution in VLM agents and the positioning of our attack relative to prior backdoor settings.
Figure 2: An overview of our threat model
Attack Eff.
Stealth
Phase
Retrieval
Method
ASR
AC ↑
GA ↑
SR ↑
Query-Only
0.23
0.64
0.29
0.20
Before Evolving
No Mem.
EvolvAttack
0.00 (-.23)
0.87 (+.23)
0.47 (+.18)
0.43 (+.23)
After Evolving
Recent- k
Query-Only
0.26
0.77
0.29
0.21
Mem.-Only
0.10
0.81
0.35
0.27
EvolvAttack
1.00 (+.74)
0.86 (+.05)
0.54 (+.19)
0.49 (+.22)
Table 1: Attack effectiveness and stealth before and after memory evolution compared to baselines on Qwen-2.5-VL-3B. The best results in each group are in bold , and second-best are underlined .
Figure 3: Attack effectiveness and stealth of EvolvAttack across model backbones and memory retrieval settings.
Figure 4: Rolling ASR and cumulative ASR of EvolvAttack in four agent pipelines. Vertical dashed lines mark the FFR r , and shaded regions the stable attack phase.
Loss Terms
ASR ↑
Stealth
Lclean
Lbackdoor
Ldormant
Lgate
ASR
SR ↑
FP ↓
✓
✓
✓
✓
0.95
0.43
0.00
✓
✓
✓
1.00
0.28
0.97
✓
✓
✓
0.00
0.28
0.00
✓
✓
✓
∗ 0.94
0.40
0.00
✓
✓
✓
0.92
0.43
0.97
Table 2: Full ablation study of the loss terms.
Figure 5: Defenses against the memory-conditional backdoor.
Appendix figures & tables9 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 6: Training loss of EVOLVATTACK over the optimization process.
Hyperparameter
Value
Optimizer
AdamW
Learning rate
2×10−4
LR schedule
Linear warmup
Warmup ratio
0.05
Batch size
1 per device
Gradient accumulation
1
Appendix
Table 3: Training hyperparameters used for EVOLVATTACK.
Split
Count
Purpose
Train
2,498 (2,123 clean + 375 poison-eligible)
LoRA fine-tuning
Held-out test
100 unique
Deployment evaluation
Appendix
Table 4: Dataset split used in our experiments.
Memory Pipeline
Update
Retrieval
Recent-history
Gated append
Last- k
Semantic
Gated append
Cosine top- k
Reward-aware
Gated append
Reward-weighted top- k
Appendix
Table 5: Representative memory-evolution mechanisms used in our controlled agent simulations. These pipelines abstract common retrieval and update strategies rather than reproducing any single agent framework end-to-end.
Figure 7: Rolling ASR on Qwen2.5-VL-3B. Left: all-patched stream. Right: ramp-density stream.
Framework
Prompt Source
Prompt Adaptation
AppAgent
Task template
Preserve agent role, task description, and history slot; replace action space and output schema.
SeeAct
System prompt
Preserve web-navigation framing and action history; replace browser actions and output schema.
Mobile-Agent v3.5
User prompt
Preserve task progress, history, and reflection; replace tool-call schema and output format.
Agent-S
Worker prompt
Preserve task hierarchy and retrieved-experience slot; replace Python action API and output format.
Appendix
Table 6: Prompt adaptation for the four agent frameworks. We preserve framework-specific task framing and memory interfaces, while adapting the native action space and output format to GUI-R1.
Forward
Image
Memory
Target
F1
Clean
∅
Benign
F2
Clean
MC
Benign
F3
Triggered
MC
Benign / Payload
F4
Triggered
MP
Payload
F5
Clean
MP
Benign
Appendix
Table 7: Forward passes used to construct the memory-aware objective. F3 provides a low-probability ignition signal, F4 amplifies the attack after payload-bearing memory emerges, and F5 prevents payload memory alone from activating the backdoor.
Variant
Forwards
Key supervision
Presence
4
Learns activation from the presence of memory context; spark is applied to the empty-memory state.
Dose-Response
4
Introduces payload-bearing memory in F4 and moves the spark to populated clean memory.
AND-Gate
5
Adds F5, explicitly enforcing (clean,MP)→benign .
Full-Coverage
5
Extends F2/F3 sampling to include empty memory, explicitly covering the deployment round-0 state.
Appendix
Table 8: Training-objective ablations. Each variant progressively covers additional regions of the image–memory state space.
Variant
ASR ↑
FP ↓
Success ↑
Presence
0%
0%
40%
Dose-Response
90%
97%
43%
AND-Gate
95%
0%
43%
Full-Coverage
84%
0%
40%
Appendix
Table 9: Ablation of the memory-aware objective. ASR is measured on triggered inputs, FP on clean inputs, and Success denotes GUI-R1 task success.
Recent advances in Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have greatly enhanced the integration of visual perception and linguistic reasoning, driving rapid progress in multimodal understanding. Despite these achievements, the security of VLMs, particularly their vulnerability to backdoor attacks, remains significantly underexplored. Existing backdoor attacks on VLMs are still in an early stage of development, with most current methods relying on generating poisoned responses that contain fixed, easily identifiable patterns. In this work, we make two key contributions. First, we demonstrate for the first time that the stealthiness of existing VLM backdoor attacks has been substantially overestimated. By adapting defense techniques originally designed for other domains (e.g., vision-only and text-only models), we show that several state-of-the-art attacks can be detected with surprising ease. Second, to address this gap, we introduce Phantasia, a context-adaptive backdoor attack that dynamically aligns its poisoned outputs with the semantics of each input. Instead of producing static poisoned patterns, Phantasia encourages models to generate contextually coherent yet malicious responses that remain plausible, thereby significantly improving stealth and adaptability. Extensive experiments across diverse VLM architectures reveal that Phantasia achieves state-of-the-art attack success rates while maintaining benign performance under various defensive settings.
Nam Duong Tran, Phi Le Nguyen
Institute for AI Innovation and Societal Impact, Hanoi University of Science and Technology
Visual language model (VLM) is rapidly being integrated into safety-critical systems such as autonomous driving, making it an important attack surface for potential backdoor attacks. Existing backdoor attacks mainly rely on unimodal, explicit, and easily detectable triggers, making it difficult to construct both covert and stable attack channels in autonomous driving scenarios. GLA introduces two naturalistic triggers: graffiti-based visual patterns generated via stable diffusion inpainting, which seamlessly blend into urban scenes, and cross-language text triggers, which introduce distributional shifts while maintaining semantic consistency to build robust language-side trigger signals. Experiments on DriveVLM show that GLA requires only a 10% poisoning ratio to achieve a 90% Attack Success Rate (ASR) and a 0% False Positive Rate (FPR). More insidiously, the backdoor does not weaken the model on clean tasks, but instead improves metrics such as BLEU-1, making it difficult for traditional performance-degradation-based detection methods to identify the attack. This study reveals underestimated security threats in self-driving VLMs and provides a new attack paradigm for backdoor evaluation in safety-critical multimodal systems.
Self-evolving LLM agents update their internal state across sessions, often by writing and reusing long-term memory. This design improves performance on long-horizon tasks but creates a security risk: untrusted external content observed during a benign session can be stored as memory and later treated as instruction. We study this risk and formalize a persistent attack we call a Zombie Agent, where an attacker covertly implants a payload that survives across sessions, effectively turning the agent into a puppet of the attacker. We present a black-box attack framework that uses only indirect exposure through attacker-controlled web content. The attack has two phases. During infection, the agent reads a poisoned source while completing a benign task and writes the payload into long-term memory through its normal update process. During trigger, the payload is retrieved or carried forward and causes unauthorized tool behavior. We design mechanism-specific persistence strategies for common memory implementations, including sliding-window and retrieval-augmented memory, to resist truncation and relevance filtering. We evaluate the attack on representative agent setups and tasks, measuring both persistence over time and the ability to induce unauthorized actions while preserving benign task quality. Our results show that memory evolution can convert one-time indirect injection into persistent compromise, which suggests that defenses focused only on per-session prompt filtering are not sufficient for self-evolving agents.
Xianglin Yang, Yufei He, Shuo Ji +2
School of Computing National University of Singapore