Stealing AI Reasoning Traces

Interesting research: “Stealing Reasoning Traces from Proprietary LLM APIs“:

Abstract: Leading large language model providers now conceal their models’ step-by-step reasoning, or chain-of-thought, to protect intellectual property and limit information leakage. Rather than storing these traces server-side, providers return them to the client as blocks of encrypted text, which the client passes back with each subsequent request. Building on prior research, we identify an architectural vulnerability: these encrypted blocks are fully compatible and interchangeable across different sessions, users, and models within a provider’s ecosystem. We exploit this compatibility to develop a scalable decryption jailbreak. By injecting an encrypted reasoning trace from a given model into a weaker, and less safeguarded model from the same provider, we force it to decode and output the trace verbatim in plaintext, without ever jailbreaking the more capable model directly. This vulnerability enables four distinct attack vectors. First, it circumvents anti-distillation mechanisms, allowing adversaries to extract a proprietary model’s reasoning, as we demonstrate across Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google. Second, it allows for large-scale private data extraction. Developers frequently share session logs publicly, unaware of contents of the encrypted blocks. By decoding 315,320 reasoning blocks scraped from public repositories, we recovered 367 Personally Identifiable Information (PII) artifacts and 182 credentials. Third, it inadvertently reveals hazardous information hidden within the reasoning process, even in cases where the model’s final, visible output safely rejects a malicious request. Fourth, attackers can leverage this flaw to execute invisible prompt injections, embedding malicious payloads entirely within encrypted blocks to poison public agentic rollouts. Following responsible disclosure, we propose concrete cryptographic and system-level mitigations to secure client-side reasoning.

Posted on September 8, 2026 at 6:20 AM3 Comments

Comments

Michael September 8, 2026 10:48 AM

So the leading chatbots, which are largely built on stolen IP, are worried about people stealing their IP. Fascinating.

Clive Robinson September 8, 2026 5:28 PM

@ ALL,

With regards this from the articles intro,

“Leading large language model providers now conceal their models’ step-by-step reasoning, or chain-of-thought, to protect intellectual property and limit information leakage.”

It sounds bad enough as indicated…

But there is actually a bit more behind it.

Some jurisdictions are in the near future require verifiable watermarking of all LLM output.

There are pros and cons to this which is one reason the AI companies are broadly on board with it as it protects them to a certain extent.

That is they can turn around and say XXX alleged output was not generated by their LLM or at a given date/time or to a given individual.

It basically adds “watermarking”…

Personally I’m not happy with “watermarking” as it turned into an abject fail for “Digital Rights Managment”(DRM) in the turn of the century.

Whilst such DRM systems will fail for detecting “plagiarism” reliably, they won’t fail in anything like that probability for protecting the AI companies…

r September 8, 2026 8:57 PM

the reasoning traces are likely pointless long term, the current LLMs are inarticulate behemouths and training and architecturesbare likely to change in the future

https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/08/24/1141740/kids-machines-language-learning/

i’m not the only one saying this is a valley camparatively to whay’s possible and what’s known, i think one of google’s(?) founders says something similar about the data architecture we’re currently using for various training. i make minimum wage though so i could be wrong, it’s still good to have these defenses going forward but yeah, all that stolen data is nothing compared to being able to formulate gravity from direct object interaction.

it’s the curious aspect of telling countries they’re going to get ‘left behind’ if you don’t buy into vendor lock-in.

Leave a comment

Blog moderation policy

Login

Allowed HTML <a href="URL"> • <em> <cite> <i> • <strong> <b> • <sub> <sup> • <ul> <ol> <li> • <blockquote> <pre> Markdown Extra syntax via https://michelf.ca/projects/php-markdown/extra/

Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.