Are You Getting What You Pay For? Auditing Model Substitution in LLM APIs
Open accessAbstract
Commercial Large Language Model (LLM) APIs create a fundamental trust problem: users pay for specific models but have no guarantee that providers deliver them faithfully. Providers may covertly substitute cheaper alternatives (e.g., quantized versions, smaller models) to reduce costs while maintaining advertised pricing. We formalize this model substitution problem and systematically evaluate detection methods under realistic adversarial conditions. Our empirical analysis reveals that software-only methods are fundamentally unreliable: statistical tests on text outputs are query-intensive and fail against subtle substitutions, while methods using log probabilities are defeated by inherent inference nondeterminism in production environments. We argue that this verification gap can be more effectively closed with hardware-level security. We propose and evaluate the use of Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs) as one practical and robust solution. Our findings demonstrate that TEEs can provide provable cryptographic guarantees of model integrity with only a modest performance overhead, offering a clear and actionable path to ensure users get what they pay for. Code is available at https://github.com/sunblaze-ucb/llm-api-audit
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Benchmarking is not a reliable estimator of parameter count.
“even benchmarking is not a reliable estimator of parameter count [12], [15], [28], [29]”
From Hollow-LLM Attack: Computationally Trivial Weights in Zero-Knowledge Verification of LLM Inference (2026) · cites this paper as [12]
The ‘Limitations of software-based verification’ section says benchmark comparisons can be unreliable when decoding parameters are undisclosed or providers evade known benchmark prompts. That supports a concern about using benchmarks to verify which model an API serves, but the paper does not specifically assess benchmarking as an estimator of parameter count. (LLM, conf=0.78)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- Jinze Bai, Shuai Bai, Yunfei Chu, Zeyu Cui, Kai Dang, Xiaodong Deng, Yang Fan, Wenbin Ge, Yu Han, Fei Huang, Binyuan Hui, Luo Ji, Mei Li, Junyang Lin, Runji Lin, Dayiheng Liu, Gao Liu, Chengqiang Lu, Keming Lu, Jianxin Ma, Rui Men, Xingzhang Ren, Xuancheng Ren, Chuanqi Tan, Sinan Tan, Jianhong Tu, Peng Wang, Shijie Wang, Wei Wang, Sheng- guang Wu, Benfeng Xu, Jin Xu, An Yang, Hao Yang, Jian Yang, Shusheng Yang, Yang Yao, Bowen Yu, Hongyi Yuan, Zheng Yuan, Jianwei Zhang, Xingxuan Zhang, Yichang Zhang, Zhenru Zhang, Chang Zhou, Jingren Zhou, Xiaohuan Zhou, and Tianhang Zhu. Qwen technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16609, 2023. · arXiv
- Guangsheng Bao, Yanbin Zhao, Zhiyang Teng, Linyi Yang, and Yue Zhang. Fast-detectgpt: Efficient zero-shot detection of machine-generated text via conditional probability curva- ture. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023.
- Parishad BehnamGhader, Vaibhav Adlakha, Marius Mosbach, Dzmitry Bahdanau, Nicolas Chapados, and Siva Reddy. LLM2vec: Large language models are secretly powerful text encoders. In First Conference on Language Modeling, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/ forum?id=IW1PR7vEBf.
- Nicholas Carlini, Daniel Paleka, Krishnamurthy Dj Dvijotham, Thomas Steinke, Jonathan Hayase, A. Feder Cooper, Katherine Lee, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr, Arthur Conmy, Eric Wallace, David Rolnick, and Florian Tramèr. Stealing part of a production language model. In Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Zico Kolter, Katherine Heller, Adrian Weller, Nuria Oliver, Jonathan Scarlett, and Felix Berkenkamp (eds.), Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 235 of Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 2024.
- Lingjiao Chen, Matei Zaharia, and James Zou. How is chatgpt's behavior changing over time?, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.09009. · arXiv
- Karl Cobbe, Vineet Kosaraju, Mohammad Bavarian, Mark Chen, Heewoo Jun, Lukasz Kaiser, Matthias Plappert, Jerry Tworek, Jacob Hilton, Reiichiro Nakano, et al. Training verifiers to solve math word problems. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.14168, 2021. · arXiv
- Jacob Devlin, Ming-Wei Chang, Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), pp. 4171-4186, Minneapolis, Minnesota, June 2019. Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.18653/v1/ N19-1423. URL https://aclanthology.org/N19-1423/. · DOI · Paper page
- Ning Ding, Yulin Chen, Bokai Xu, Yujia Qin, Zhi Zheng, Shengding Hu, Zhiyuan Liu, Maosong Sun, and Bowen Zhou. Enhancing chat language models by scaling high-quality instructional conversations, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.14233. · arXiv
- Sabri Eyuboglu, Karan Goel, Arjun Desai, Lingjiao Chen, Mathew Monfort, Chris Ré, and James Zou. Model changelists: Characterizing updates to ml models. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp. 2432-2453, 2024.
- Matthew Finlayson, Xiang Ren, and Swabha Swayamdipta. Logits of api-protected llms leak proprietary information, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.09539. · arXiv
- Irena Gao, Percy Liang, and Carlos Guestrin. Model equality testing: Which model is this api serving?, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.20247. · arXiv
- Soumya Suvra Ghosal, Souradip Chakraborty, Jonas Geiping, Furong Huang, Dinesh Manocha, and Amrit Singh Bedi. Towards possibilities & impossibilities of ai-generated text detection: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15264, 2023. · arXiv
- Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou, Mantas Mazeika, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. Measuring massive multitask language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2009.03300, 2020. · arXiv
- Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Saurav Kadavath, Akul Arora, Steven Basart, Eric Tang, Dawn Song, and Jacob Steinhardt. Measuring mathematical problem solving with the math dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.03874, 2021. · arXiv
- Xiaomeng Hu, Pin-Yu Chen, and Tsung-Yi Ho. Radar: Robust ai-text detection via adversar- ial learning. Advances in neural information processing systems, 36:15077-15095, 2023.
- Yangsibo Huang, Milad Nasr, Anastasios Angelopoulos, Nicholas Carlini, Wei-Lin Chiang, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Daphne Ippolito, Matthew Jagielski, Katherine Lee, Ken Ziyu Liu, Ion Stoica, Florian Tramer, and Chiyuan Zhang. Exploring and mitigating adversarial manipulation of voting-based leaderboards, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2501.07493. · arXiv
- John Kirchenbauer, Jonas Geiping, Yuxin Wen, Jonathan Katz, Ian Miers, and Tom Goldstein. A watermark for large language models. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 17061-17084. PMLR, 2023.
- Woosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng, Lianmin Zheng, Cody Hao Yu, Joseph Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica. Efficient memory management for large language model serving with pagedattention. In Proceedings of the 29th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 611-626, 2023.
- Eric Mitchell, Yoonho Lee, Alexander Khazatsky, Christopher D Manning, and Chelsea Finn. Detectgpt: Zero-shot machine-generated text detection using probability curvature. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 24950-24962. PMLR, 2023.
- Colin Raffel, Noam Shazeer, Adam Roberts, Katherine Lee, Sharan Narang, Michael Matena, Yanqi Zhou, Wei Li, and Peter J Liu. Exploring the limits of transfer learning with a unified text-to-text transformer. Journal of machine learning research, 21(140):1-67, 2020.
- David Rein, Betty Li Hou, Asa Cooper Stickland, Jackson Petty, Richard Yuanzhe Pang, Julien Dirani, Julian Michael, and Samuel R Bowman. Gpqa: A graduate-level google- proof q&a benchmark. In First Conference on Language Modeling, 2024.
- Dylan Sam, Marc Finzi, and J Zico Kolter. Predicting the performance of black-box llms through self-queries. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.01558, 2025. · arXiv
- Haochen Sun, Jason Li, and Hongyang Zhang. zkllm: Zero knowledge proofs for large language models. In Proceedings of the 2024 on ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 4405-4419, 2024a.
- Mingjie Sun, Yida Yin, Zhiqiu Xu, J. Zico Kolter, and Zhuang Liu. Idiosyncrasies in large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.12150, 2025. · arXiv
- Yifan Sun, Yuhang Li, Yue Zhang, Yuchen Jin, and Huan Zhang. Svip: Towards verifiable inference of open-source large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.22307, 2024b. · arXiv
- Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971, 2023. · arXiv
- Xianjun Yang, Liangming Pan, Xuandong Zhao, Haifeng Chen, Linda Petzold, William Yang Wang, and Wei Cheng. A survey on detection of llms-generated content. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15654, 2023. · arXiv
- Xianjun Yang, Wei Cheng, Yue Wu, Linda Ruth Petzold, William Yang Wang, and Haifeng Chen. DNA-GPT: divergent n-gram analysis for training-free detection of gpt-generated text. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2024, Vienna, Austria, May 7-11, 2024. OpenReview.net, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id= Xlayxj2fWp.
- Xuandong Zhao, Prabhanjan Vijendra Ananth, Lei Li, and Yu-Xiang Wang. Provable robust watermarking for ai-generated text. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2024, Vienna, Austria, May 7-11, 2024. OpenReview.net, 2024a. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=SsmT8aO45L.
- Xuandong Zhao, Sam Gunn, Miranda Christ, Jaiden Fairoze, Andres Fabrega, Nicholas Carlini, Sanjam Garg, Sanghyun Hong, Milad Nasr, Florian Tramèr, Somesh Jha, Lei Li, Yu-Xiang Wang, and Dawn Song. Sok: Watermarking for ai-generated content. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.18479, 2024b. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hollow-LLM Attack: Computationally Trivial Weights in Zero-Knowledge Verification of LLM Inference
Gong, C., Liu, B., & Li, M. (2026) · 2026 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) · doi:10.1109/sp63933.2026.00258
- Authors
- Cai, W., Shi, T., Zhao, X., & Song, D.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2025
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2504.04715
- OpenAlex
- W4416117489
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
- Keywords
- model integrity verification, trusted execution environments, hardware security, quantized models, LLM auditing
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review