Kind of. You can’t do it 100% because in theory an attacker controlling input and seeing output could reflect though intermediate layers, but if you add more intermediate steps to processing a prompt you can significantly cut down on the injection potential.
For example, fine tuning a model to take unsanitized input and rewrite it into Esperanto without malicious instructions and then having another model translate back from Esperanto into English before feeding it into the actual model, and having a final pass that removes anything not appropriate.
Won’t this cause subtle but serious issue? Kinda like how pomegranate translates to “granada” in Spanish, but when you translate “granada” back to English it translates to grenade?
How do you sanitize ai prompts? With more prompts?
With other AIs
Kind of. You can’t do it 100% because in theory an attacker controlling input and seeing output could reflect though intermediate layers, but if you add more intermediate steps to processing a prompt you can significantly cut down on the injection potential.
For example, fine tuning a model to take unsanitized input and rewrite it into Esperanto without malicious instructions and then having another model translate back from Esperanto into English before feeding it into the actual model, and having a final pass that removes anything not appropriate.
Won’t this cause subtle but serious issue? Kinda like how pomegranate translates to “granada” in Spanish, but when you translate “granada” back to English it translates to grenade?
It’s really easy, just throw an error if you detect a program will cause a halt. I don’t know why these engineers refuse to just patch it.
I understood that reference
Easy, you just have a human worker strip out anything that could be problematic, and try not to bring it up around your investors.