Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper benchmarks eight techniques for preserving privacy in LLM requests, addressing the risk of sensitive data exposure when using cloud LLM APIs. They implement and evaluate four practical techniques (local inference, redaction, rephrasing, differential privacy) and their combinations on a leak benchmark. The combination of local inference, redaction, and rephrasing achieves the best privacy protection, reducing PII leaks to 0.6% and proprietary code leaks to 31.3%.
Stop blindly trusting cloud LLM APIs: local inference, redaction, and rephrasing can slash PII leaks to near zero.
Coding agents and LLM-powered applications routinely send potentially sensitive content to cloud LLM APIs where it may be logged, retained, used for training, or subpoenaed. Existing privacy tooling focuses on network-level encryption and organization-level DLP, neither of which addresses the content of prompts themselves. We present a systematic empirical evaluation of eight techniques for privacy-preserving LLM requests: (A) local-only inference, (B) redaction with placeholder restoration, (C) semantic rephrasing, (D) Trusted Execution Environment hosted inference, (E) split inference, (F) fully homomorphic encryption, (G) secret sharing via multi-party computation, and (H) differential-privacy noise. We implement all eight (or a tractable research-stage subset where deployment is not yet feasible) in an open-source shim compatible with MCP and any OpenAI-compatible API. We evaluate the four practical options (A, B, C, H) and their combinations across four workload classes using a ground-truth-labelled leak benchmark of 1,300 samples with 4,014 annotations. Our headline finding is that no single technique dominates: the combination A+B+C (route locally when possible, redact and rephrase the rest) achieves 0.6% combined leak on PII and 31.3% on proprietary code, with zero exact leaks on PII across 500 samples. We present a decision rule that selects the appropriate option(s) from a threat-model budget and workload characterisation. Code, benchmarks, and evaluation harness are released at https://github.com/jayluxferro/llm-redactor.