TL;DR
This paper systematically evaluates eight privacy-preserving techniques for LLM requests, finding that combining local inference, redaction, and rephrasing offers effective privacy with minimal leaks.
Contribution
It introduces an open-source framework comparing eight privacy techniques for LLMs, providing practical guidance and a decision rule for selecting methods based on threat models.
Findings
No single technique dominates in privacy protection.
Combining local inference, redaction, and rephrasing reduces leaks significantly.
The open-source toolkit enables benchmarking and decision-making for privacy in LLMs.
Abstract
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…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
