aiqbench analysis
This research identifies a critical vulnerability in reasoning LLMs where combining malicious output prefixes with injected reasoning steps can bypass safety filters at near-perfect rates, even when the reasoning channel itself is hidden. The study demonstrates that while standalone reasoning injections are ineffective, the interaction between prefix manipulation and internal logic generation creates a potent attack vector against frontier models like Gemini 3, DeepSeek V4, and Claude Haiku 4.5. For developers of reasoning-capable systems, this underscores the urgent need to decouple or strictly sanitize output prefixes from the model's internal reasoning traces to prevent jailbreaks.
Prefilling the Reasoning Channel: Output-Prefix Attacks on Reasoning LLMs
arXiv:2609.29775v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) consume and produce a single sequence of text; hence, if text can be added to the beginning of the LLM's response, i.e., an output prefix, then all subsequent tokens will be conditioned on it. This output-prefix attack technique is a cheap black-box prompt injection. Prior work has shown this type of attack can reliably jailbreak non-reasoning models. Most reasoning models add an intermediate scratchpad reasoning step before the assistant's final response. The ability to edit this reasoning channel is exposed by some APIs and attack vectors can be leveraged for reasoning injection attacks. We present the first systematic, controlled study that isolates the scratchpad reasoning channel as an output-prefix attack vector, and the first to compare reasoning-only, output-prefix-only and reasoning-plus-output-prefix attacks across both exposed- and hidden-reasoning models. Using a factorial design of 3 prefix types $\times$ 2 reasoning injections over $1{,}800$ test cases drawn from AdvBench, we attack three 2026-era frontier models Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DeepSeek V4 Flash, and Claude Haiku 4.5. We find that injecting malicious reasoning alone is essentially inert ($\approx0\%$ attack success), but injecting the same reasoning together with a trivial output prefix raises the attack success rate to as high as $99\%$ for some models. For this type of attack we find that contextual prefixes work better than static prefixes; and that susceptibility is dependent on the model.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) consume and produce a single sequence of text; hence, if text can be added to the beginning of the LLM's response, i.e., an output prefix, then all subsequent tokens will be conditioned on it. This output-prefix attack technique is a cheap black-box prompt injection. Prior work has shown this type of attack can reliably jailbreak non-reasoning models. Most reasoning models add an intermediate scratchpad reasoning step before the assistant's final response. The ability to edit this reasoning channel is exposed by some APIs and attack vectors can be leveraged for reasoning injection attacks. We present the first systematic, controlled study that isolates the scratchpad reasoning channel as an output-prefix attack vector, and the first to compare reasoning-only, output-prefix-only and reasoning-plus-output-prefix attacks across both exposed- and hidden-reasoning models. Using a factorial design of 3 prefix types $\times$ 2 reasoning injections over $1{,}800$ test cases drawn from AdvBench, we attack three 2026-era frontier models Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DeepSeek V4 Flash, and Claude Haiku 4.5. We find that injecting malicious reasoning alone is essentially inert ($\approx0\%$ attack success), but injecting the same reasoning together with a trivial output prefix raises the attack success rate to as high as $99\%$ for some models. For this type of attack we find that contextual prefixes work better than static prefixes; and that susceptibility is dependent on the model.
Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2609.29775 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2609.29775v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.29775 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 325 words
Related coverage

Frontier Risk Report (February to March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Frontier AI Risk Report (February–March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Informe de riesgos de la IA de frontera (febrero–marzo de 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 18, 2026