Status: Pre-registration draft
The design, the metrics, the hypotheses and the analysis plan are published here before any experiment runs. There are no results yet. Results, code and data will be released together.
The question
Do access controls on a fine-tuned model withhold what its documents imply as reliably as what they state?
Organizations fine-tune language models on internal documents and restrict what each user may see. These restrictions are defined over documents. A fine-tuned model holds facts rather than documents, and it can combine facts that come from different documents. A user may then obtain a restricted fact that no document they may read states. In database security, such a path is called an inference channel.
NeedToKnow measures this on synthetic organizations, where every label is known. For each world it lists every fact the documents imply, with the facts and offices each one depends on, and it scores answers by exact matching, without a human or model judge.
For teams that deploy fine-tuned models. A method implements one interface: build a deployment from documents labeled by office, then answer a reader with a given clearance. NeedToKnow reports stated, derived and open-request leakage, retained utility and adapter counts, next to four reference controls.
It runs where the model runs. The worlds are synthetic and the scoring is code, so the benchmark runs offline on the hardware the model will be deployed on, including air-gapped systems. Rerunning on the same private worlds after a change of model or recipe gives a regression test.
In this project
Explainer, paper, sandbox and code
Explainer
How the benchmark works Stated and derived facts, how worlds and labels are built, how leakage is scored, and the study. Read the explainerPaper
Pre-registration draft 13 pages: the benchmark, the protocol and the hypotheses. Results are to be added. Abstract and PDFSandbox
Development world 101 Browse documents and questions by clearance, and score a model's response in your browser. Open the sandboxCode
Released with the results Generator, labels, scorer and evaluation harness, under Apache 2.0. What the release containsAt a glance
The benchmark and the study
- Worlds
- Synthetic organizations150 documents and five offices per world, with invented names
- Implied facts
- 8,351 per world, on average84% depend on more than one office
- Clearances
- SixThree single offices, two pairs, and four of the five offices
- Questions
- 540 direct questions per worldplus about 92 open requests
- Scoring
- Exact matchingNo human or model judge; runs offline
- Main metric
- Leakage gapDerived minus stated leakage, on joins
- Models
- Qwen3.5-9B, gpt-oss-20b, gpt-oss-120b, InklingOpen-weight, 9B to 975B parameters
- Access controls
- FourPrompted policy, permission fine-tuning, retrieval over permitted documents, per-clearance adapters
- Estimated cost
- About $3,600Five test worlds, including about 36 GPU-hours self-hosted
History
Versions
- Pre-registration draft published, with the explainer and the sandbox.
Cite
BibTeX
@misc{dauber2026needtoknow,
title = {{NeedToKnow}: A Benchmark for Inference Channels in Fine-Tuned Language Models},
author = {Dauber, Max},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {Signet Systems},
note = {Pre-registration draft},
url = {https://research.signet-systems.com/needtoknow/}
}