arXiv:2611.07633v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Many enterprise projects now pass free text to large language models (LLMs), and that text often contains personally identifiable information (PII) such as names, phone numbers, email addresses, home addresses and dates of birth. Once a prompt is sent, this data is copied into provider systems, application logs and observability traces. Redacting PII before the call is an obvious control, yet teams seldom have numbers on what it costs in latency or what it lets through. This paper compares four redaction designs that any LLM pipeline can adopt: a pure regular-expression (regex) redactor, Microsoft Presidio running on a spaCy model, a hybrid in which Presidio finds only person names while regex handles structured identifiers, and a fast hybrid that calls spaCy's named-entity component directly. All four share a known-entity rule, which removes the person the system already knows it is handling, and a consistent placeholder scheme, so the LLM can still tell one person from another after redaction. We evaluate the designs on a sample workflow, which we call ProfileAssist, that turns resumes into structured profiles, using 100 synthetic resumes (523 characters on average, with 900 PII values and 600 business terms that must survive). Regex ran at a 0.20 ms median but caught only 88.9% of PII, because it cannot find names that are not known in advance, such as the references listed in a resume. Presidio, hybrid and fast hybrid each caught 100% of PII and kept 100% of business terms, at median latencies of 37.59 ms, 30.23 ms and 13.48 ms. Measured against a 9,120 ms median LLM call, even the slowest option adds only 0.41% to the request. We therefore recommend the fast hybrid as a default for LLM pipelines that handle personal data, with regex kept as a safety net rather than as the only control.
Abstract: Many enterprise projects now pass free text to large language models (LLMs), and that text often contains personally identifiable information (PII) such as names, phone numbers, email addresses, home addresses and dates of birth. Once a prompt is sent, this data is copied into provider systems, application logs and observability traces. Redacting PII before the call is an obvious control, yet teams seldom have numbers on what it costs in latency or what it lets through. This paper compares four redaction designs that any LLM pipeline can adopt: a pure regular-expression (regex) redactor, Microsoft Presidio running on a spaCy model, a hybrid in which Presidio finds only person names while regex handles structured identifiers, and a fast hybrid that calls spaCy's named-entity component directly. All four share a known-entity rule, which removes the person the system already knows it is handling, and a consistent placeholder scheme, so the LLM can still tell one person from another after redaction. We evaluate the designs on a sample workflow, which we call ProfileAssist, that turns resumes into structured profiles, using 100 synthetic resumes (523 characters on average, with 900 PII values and 600 business terms that must survive). Regex ran at a 0.20 ms median but caught only 88.9% of PII, because it cannot find names that are not known in advance, such as the references listed in a resume. Presidio, hybrid and fast hybrid each caught 100% of PII and kept 100% of business terms, at median latencies of 37.59 ms, 30.23 ms and 13.48 ms. Measured against a 9,120 ms median LLM call, even the slowest option adds only 0.41% to the request. We therefore recommend the fast hybrid as a default for LLM pipelines that handle personal data, with regex kept as a safety net rather than as the only control.
This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org
Read the original article:
Redacting Personal Data: A Speed and Accuracy Comparison of Regex, Presidio and Hybrid Designs