Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research details
Back to research findings
LMVD-ID: 7573a327
Paper published January 1, 2026
Entry analyzed February 21, 2026
Paper-reported evidence
Confidence: Source-linked

The LMVD-ID is an internal research identifier, not an official CVE identifier.

Physical Navigation Prompt Injection

LLM-based navigation agents, including NavGPT and prompt-tuned outdoor agents, are vulnerable to adaptive prompt injection attacks. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to hijack the physical movement of the…

BibTeX citation

Paper-evaluated models(3)

  • GPT-3.5
  • GPT-4
  • Llama 2 7B

Description

LLM-based navigation agents, including NavGPT and prompt-tuned outdoor agents, are vulnerable to adaptive prompt injection attacks. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to hijack the physical movement of the agent by embedding optimized malicious instructions into benign natural language inputs. The issue arises because the agents parse user instructions to generate executable plans without sufficient separation between control logic and untrusted input. The PINA (Prompt Injection Attack against Navigation Agents) framework exploits this by utilizing a feedback-loop mechanism—comprising a Distribution Analyzer (measuring KL divergence and token probability shifts) and an Attack Evaluator—to iteratively refine injection prompts. This technique functions effectively in black-box settings and persists despite long-context histories that typically dilute static injections.

Examples

Specific injection strings are dynamically generated based on the target environment and instruction set.

  • See repository at https://github.com/nikikiki6/PINA (opens in a new tab) for the PINA framework implementation, including the Attack Evaluator and Adaptive Prompt Refinement algorithms used to generate effective injection prompts against the R2R (Room-to-Room) dataset.

Impact

Successful exploitation results in the physical misdirection of the navigation agent. This causes:

  • Mission Failure: The agent fails to reach the designated target (Attack Success Rate of 75% on indoor agents and 100% on outdoor agents).
  • Operational Inefficiency: drastically reduced SPL (Success weighted by Path Length) and increased trajectory length.
  • Physical Safety Risks: The agent can be forced into unsafe routes or maneuvers, potentially leading to property damage or physical harm in the operating environment.

Affected Systems

  • NavGPT (utilizing GPT-3.5-turbo and GPT-4)
  • LLM-based outdoor navigation agents (specifically those based on prompt-tuning architectures like Balcı et al.)
  • Robotic navigation systems integrating LLMs for natural language instruction following without strict input sanitization layers.

Mitigation Steps

  • Implement "self-reminder" strategies where system instructions are prefixed with reinforcement phrases (e.g., "You should remind yourself of the original goal...") to suppress injected content (Note: The paper demonstrates this only partially reduces ASR from 75.00% to 68.80%).
  • Utilize the PINA evaluation framework to conduct adversarial training, exposing the agent to optimized injection prompts during the tuning phase to improve resilience.

Research context and confidence

Evidence and verification
Paper-reported; independent reproduction is not documented.
Primary research source linked.
Severity
Not rated by this catalog.
Source and publication type
arXiv · Research preprint.
Peer-review status is not provided by this source.
Author and publication status
Author metadata is not stored; see the primary paper.
Threat model and attacker access
Black-box model, service, or application access.
Related deployment categories
Agent workflows
Taxonomy labels only; paper-specific deployment prerequisites are not inferred.
Affected systems
NavGPT (utilizing GPT-3.5-turbo and GPT-4) LLM-based outdoor navigation agents (specifically those based on prompt-tuning architectures like Balcı et al.) Robotic navigation systems integrating LLMs for natural…

Research Paper

PINA: Prompt Injection Attack against Navigation Agents

Primary source: arXiv. Findings are reported by the cited research and have not been independently verified.

View Paper

Evidence

This entry is based on a primary research source. Its findings are paper-reported; independent reproduction and verification are not claimed.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.13612