Re:Show HN: RAG knowledge base poisoning lab, 100% local
by jorl17 on Thursday March 12, 2026 @10:38PM
(#47360071)
Perhaps this is in line with what you had in mind? https://patents.google.com/patent/US12118471
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Show HN: RAG knowledge base poisoning lab, 100% local
by LoganDark on Thursday March 12, 2026 @11:42PM
(#47360438)
> The input is represented as tokens, wherein the trusted instructions and the untrusted instructions are represented using incompatible token sets.
Yes, exactly!
Re:Show HN: RAG knowledge base poisoning lab, 100% local
by aminerj on Saturday March 14, 2026 @03:01PM
(#47379952)
This is the deterministic fix that all the heuristic defenses are approximating. Separate token vocabularies for trusted and untrusted context would make the trust boundary architectural rather than probabilistic -- the model literally cannot confuse a retrieved document with a system instruction because they don't share a token space.
The gap between "patented" and "deployed in production inference infrastructure" is the interesting question. Do you know if anyone is actually implementing this in a shipping model or is it still purely research?