Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

The Privacy Fallacy of Crowdsourced Fine-Tuning: Extracting Proprietary Data via Topic-Based Poisoning

Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) is widely used to adapt large language models to downstream tasks. Crowdsourcing user conversations is an established approach to collecting SFT data at scale while reducing the need for costly manual annotation. However, it also allows untrusted users to contribute data to the fine-tuning pipeline. We investigate an underexplored privacy risk arising from this setting: can a malicious user poison a small fraction of the crowdsourced data to amplify extraction of previously unseen instructions contributed by other users? We show that this is possible using only black-box, output-only access to the deployed model. Experiments across four models and two datasets...

AuthorsSae Furukawa, Alina Oprea
Primary categorycs.CR
Published27 September 2026
Last updated at source27 September 2026
cs.CRcs.LG
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/9867993d-651b-4f4a-abfa-521bdb0cc3a5" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.