Prompt injection defense token cost
A safety prefix feels free — it is just a few sentences in the system prompt. But you pay for those sentences on every request, forever. This tool turns that into a monthly number and sets it next to the risk-adjusted cost of an injection attack, so the security decision becomes an expected-value comparison instead of a gut call.
How it works
The tool computes two figures over a 30-day month:
- Defense cost =
defense_tokens × input_price × requests_per_day × 30. This is the unavoidable overhead of carrying the prefix on every call. - Risk-adjusted incident cost =
requests_per_day × 30 × injection_probability × incident_cost. This is the expected loss if you ship without the prefix, assuming the prefix is what stops those injections.
If the expected incident cost exceeds the defense cost, the prefix is worth it on average. The tool also shows the break-even injection probability — the risk level at which the two numbers are equal — so you can sanity-check whether your risk estimate is above or below that threshold.
Tips and notes
- The break-even probability is usually tiny, which is why almost every production app carries some injection defense — the prefix is cheap relative to a single bad incident.
- Defense tokens add to latency and context usage too, not just cost; keep the prefix tight.
- This prices only the instruction-prefix layer. A real defense stack also includes a guard model (see the guard-model cost calculator), input sanitization, and constrained tool permissions — budget for those separately.
- Tail risk matters: even when the expected-value math is close, a single catastrophic breach can dwarf years of prefix cost, so bias toward defending when incident cost is high.