Papers › Good-Enough LLM Obfuscation (GELO)

Good-Enough LLM Obfuscation (GELO)

5 Mar 2026arXiv:2603.05035added by Syntology

Anatoly Belikov, Ilya Fedotov

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly served on shared accelerators where an adversary with read access to device memory can observe KV caches and hidden states, threatening prompt privacy for open-source models. Cryptographic protections such as MPC and FHE offer strong guarantees but remain one to two orders of magnitude too slow for interactive inference, while static obfuscation schemes break under multi-run statistical attacks once the model is known. We present GELO (Good-Enough LLM Obfuscation), a lightweight protocol for privacy-preserving inference that limits information leakage from untrusted accelerator observations by hiding hidden states with fresh, per-batch invertible mixing. For each offloaded projection, the TEE samples a random matrix A, forms U = AH, offloads U and weights W to the accelerator, and then applies A⁻¹ on return, so that A⁻¹((AH)W ) = HW and outputs are unchanged. Because mixing is never reused across batches, the attacker faces only a single-batch blind source separation problem. We analyse information leakage and introduce two practical defences: (i) non-orthogonal mixing to mask Gram matrices, and (ii) orthogonal mixing augmented with a small fraction of high-energy "shield" vectors that pollute higher-order statistics. On Llama-2 7B, GELO preserves float32 outputs exactly, closely matches low-precision baselines, and shows about $20$--30% compute-side overhead in a controlled offload microbenchmark; an unoptimized remote prototype is dominated by transport overhead, motivating deeper serving-engine integration. GELO resists ICA/BSS and anchor-assisted attacks; a 60M-parameter transformer-based unmixing attack also fails under strong mixing and shielding.

PaperPDFCode Syntology ran

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2603.05035")

Code

Syntology Ran 1 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 1 has no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran · fixture could not drive it.

By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 2 samples from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

noskill/gelo found in paper text by Syntology report

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

2 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 1 has no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

1ran · fixture could not drive it
1unverified

Licence: 2 of the 2 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from noskill/gelo. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

_batch_left_mul noskill/gelo/gelo/gelo_attention.py found in paper text by Syntology ran · fixture could not drive it fingerprinted no licence file found · pointer only · 1ba6a4eb3fb7f822 · report
GeloObfuscatedLinear noskill/gelo/gelo/gelo_attention.py found in paper text by Syntology unverified no licence file found · pointer only · ded84c44bef9463b · report

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2603.05035, was issued in March 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections