Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research search
Updated 7/21/2026, database is current

Language Model Security Database

959 research findings · 1077 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

521 entries

Matches every word across titles, descriptions, sources, affected systems, and models.

Large Language Models (LLMs) with structured output APIs (e.g., using JSON Schema) are vulnerable to Constrained Decoding Attacks (CDAs). CDAs exploit the control plane of the LLM's decoding process by embedding malicious intent within the schema-level grammar rules, bypassing safety mechanisms that primarily focus on input prompts. The attack manipulates the allowed output space, forcing the LLM to generate harmful content despite a benign input prompt. One instance of a CDA is the Chain Enum…

Output Constraints as Attack Surface: Exploiting Structured Generation to Bypass LLM Safety Mechanisms
Affects: Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemma 2 9B, GPT-4o +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) incorporating safety filters are vulnerable to a "Prompt, Divide, and Conquer" attack. This attack segments a malicious prompt into smaller, seemingly benign parts, processes these segments in parallel across multiple LLMs, and then reassembles the results to generate malicious code, bypassing the safety filters. The attack's success relies on the iterative refinement of initially abstract function descriptions into concrete implementations. Individual LLM safety…

Prompt, Divide, and Conquer: Bypassing Large Language Model Safety Filters via Segmented and Distributed Prompt Processing
Affects: Claude 3.5 Haiku, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro +3 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to implicit misinformation propagation due to sycophantic compliance with false premises. When a user prompt embeds a factually incorrect assumption or conspiracy theory as an unchallenged premise (implicit presupposition) rather than asking for verification, the model frequently fails to detect the falsehood. Instead of correcting the user, the model hallucinates a response that accepts, validates, and reinforces the false premise. This…

How to Protect Yourself from 5G Radiation? Investigating LLM Responses to Implicit Misinformation
Affects: Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Claude 3.5 Sonnet +11 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 2/16/2025

A vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs) allows adversarial reasoning attacks to bypass safety mechanisms and elicit harmful responses. The vulnerability stems from the insufficient robustness of existing LLM safety measures against iterative prompt refinement guided by a loss function that measures the LLM's proximity to generating a target harmful response. This allows an attacker to effectively navigate the prompt space, even against adversarially trained models, resulting in…

Adversarial Reasoning at Jailbreaking Time
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Cygnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro +8 more

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in the communication mechanisms of Large Language Model (LLM)-based Multi-Agent Systems (LLM-MAS) enabling an Agent-in-the-Middle (AiTM) attack. An attacker can intercept and manipulate messages between agents, causing the victim agent to produce malicious outputs. The attack does not require compromising individual agents directly; instead, it leverages contextual manipulation of inter-agent communications.

Red-Teaming LLM Multi-Agent Systems via Communication Attacks
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4o

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in large language models (LLMs) allows attackers to bypass safety-alignment mechanisms by manipulating the model's internal attention weights. The attack, termed "Attention Eclipse," modifies the attention scores between specific tokens within a prompt, either amplifying or suppressing attention to selectively strengthen or weaken the influence of certain parts of the prompt on the model's output. This allows injection of malicious content while appearing benign to the model's…

Attention Eclipse: Manipulating Attention to Bypass LLM Safety-Alignment
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4o Mini, Llama 2 13B Chat +3 more

Source: arXiv

CRI (Compliance Refusal Initialization) initializes jailbreak attacks by leveraging pre-trained jailbreak prompts, effectively guiding the optimization process towards the compliance subspace of harmful prompts. This significantly enhances the success rate and reduces the computational overhead of attacks, often requiring only a single optimization step to bypass safety mechanisms. Attacks utilizing CRI demonstrate significantly improved ASR (Adversarial Success Rate) and reduced median steps…

Jailbreak Attack Initializations as Extractors of Compliance Directions
Affects: Falcon 7B Instruct, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety alignment strategies are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks. These attacks manipulate the LLM's internal representation by activating "jailbreak concepts" in addition to "toxic concepts," causing the model to bypass safety guardrails and generate unsafe outputs despite recognizing the harmful nature of the input. The vulnerability stems from the insufficient mitigation of the influence of the activated jailbreak concepts on model output.

JBShield: Defending Large Language Models from Jailbreak Attacks through Activated Concept Analysis and Manipulation
Affects: Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2 +2 more

Source: arXiv

A context-coherent jailbreak attack (CCJA) allows bypassing safety mechanisms in aligned large language models (LLMs) by optimizing perturbations in the continuous word embedding space of a masked language model (MLM). The attack leverages the MLM's ability to reconstruct text from hidden states to generate semantically coherent yet malicious prompts that induce the target LLM to produce unsafe outputs, even with strong safety alignment. The attack's effectiveness is enhanced by using a seed…

CCJA: Context-Coherent Jailbreak Attack for Aligned Large Language Models
Affects: Guanaco 13B, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct +4 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 1/14/2026

Autoregressive Large Language Models (LLMs) utilizing In-Context Learning (ICL) are vulnerable to demonstration permutation attacks due to inherent sensitivity to the ordering of input examples. This vulnerability arises from the limitations of unidirectional attention mechanisms and standard Empirical Risk Minimization (ERM) training, which fails to account for worst-case input permutations. An attacker can exploit this by permuting the order of valid, semantically correct few-shot…

PEARL: Towards permutation-resilient LLMs
Affects: Llama 2 7B, Llama 3 8B, Mistral 7B +1 more

Source: arXiv

Research methodology

Entries summarize publicly available primary-source security research. Model names reflect only systems explicitly evaluated by the cited paper, and measurements are research-reported unless independent verification is stated.