Papers › BadMerging: Backdoor Attacks Against Model Merging

BadMerging: Backdoor Attacks Against Model Merging

14 Aug 2024arXiv:2408.07362archive 2025-07-28

Jinghuai Zhang, Jianfeng Chi, Zheng Li, Kunlin Cai, Yang Zhang, Yuan Tian

Fine-tuning pre-trained models for downstream tasks has led to a proliferation of open-sourced task-specific models. Recently, Model Merging (MM) has emerged as an effective approach to facilitate knowledge transfer among these independently fine-tuned models. MM directly combines multiple fine-tuned task-specific models into a merged model without additional training, and the resulting model shows enhanced capabilities in multiple tasks. Although MM provides great utility, it may come with security risks because an adversary can exploit MM to affect multiple downstream tasks. However, the security risks of MM have barely been studied. In this paper, we first find that MM, as a new learning paradigm, introduces unique challenges for existing backdoor attacks due to the merging process. To address these challenges, we introduce BadMerging, the first backdoor attack specifically designed for MM. Notably, BadMerging allows an adversary to compromise the entire merged model by contributing as few as one backdoored task-specific model. BadMerging comprises a two-stage attack mechanism and a novel feature-interpolation-based loss to enhance the robustness of embedded backdoors against the changes of different merging parameters. Considering that a merged model may incorporate tasks from different domains, BadMerging can jointly compromise the tasks provided by the adversary (on-task attack) and other contributors (off-task attack) and solve the corresponding unique challenges with novel attack designs. Extensive experiments show that BadMerging achieves remarkable attacks against various MM algorithms. Our ablation study demonstrates that the proposed attack designs can progressively contribute to the attack performance. Finally, we show that prior defense mechanisms fail to defend against our attacks, highlighting the need for more advanced defense.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. 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

3 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 3 of the 3 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 jzhang538/badmerging. “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.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

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