# Learning Steganography Is Easy, Learning Steganographic Reasoning Is Hard

> Source: <https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.39838>
> Published: 2026-10-01 08:07:08+00:00

# Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence

  [Submitted on 30 Sep 2026]

# Title:Learning Steganography Is Easy, Learning Steganographic Reasoning Is Hard

[View PDF](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.39838)

[HTML (experimental)](https://arxiv.org/html/2609.39838v1)

Abstract:Chain-of-thought monitoring as an approach for AI oversight and control is threatened by the possibility of steganographic reasoning, where LLMs conceal their reasoning inside innocuous-looking text. Two neighbouring capabilities, steganographic messaging (passing a concealed message) and encoded reasoning (reasoning in an illegible but unconcealed format), have already been shown to emerge under training pressures that occur in real pipelines, such as reinforcement learning against monitors. This suggests that steganographic reasoning too might arise as an unintended side effect of training. Here, we compare how easily models learn steganographic reasoning and these two neighbouring capabilities across three elicitation methods: reinforcement learning, in-context learning, and supervised fine-tuning (SFT).

For most tasks, models learn steganographic reasoning only under SFT, while they learn steganographic messaging and encoded reasoning under all three elicitation methods. Even under SFT, steganographic reasoning requires at least twice as much training as messaging, and for several model-task combinations it is not learned at all. However, on a cover task that makes hiding information especially convenient, steganographic reasoning can be successfully learned under all three elicitation methods. Steganographic reasoning is thus much harder than steganographic messaging and encoded reasoning, and learning the latter two does not imply learning the former. Yet it lies within reach: an easy version is learned under every elicitation method, when the cover task is convenient for hiding information.

### Current browse context:

cs.AI

### References & Citations

Loading...

# Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer 

*(*[What is the Explorer?](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/showcase.html#arxiv-bibliographic-explorer))
Connected Papers 

*(*[What is Connected Papers?](https://www.connectedpapers.com/about))
Litmaps 

*(*[What is Litmaps?](https://www.litmaps.co/))
scite Smart Citations 

*(*[What are Smart Citations?](https://www.scite.ai/))
# Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv 

*(*[What is alphaXiv?](https://alphaxiv.org/))
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers 

*(*[What is CatalyzeX?](https://www.catalyzex.com))
DagsHub 

*(*[What is DagsHub?](https://dagshub.com/))
Gotit.pub 

*(*[What is GotitPub?](http://gotit.pub/faq))
Hugging Face 

*(*[What is Huggingface?](https://huggingface.co/huggingface))
ScienceCast 

*(*[What is ScienceCast?](https://sciencecast.org/welcome))
# Demos

# Recommenders and Search Tools

Influence Flower 

*(*[What are Influence Flowers?](https://influencemap.cmlab.dev/))
CORE Recommender 

*(*[What is CORE?](https://core.ac.uk/services/recommender))
# arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? [**Learn more about arXivLabs**](https://info.arxiv.org/labs/index.html).