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

340 entries

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

Updated 12/28/2024

The COLD-Attack framework allows for the generation of stealthy and controllable adversarial prompts that can bypass safety mechanisms in various Large Language Models (LLMs). The attack leverages an energy-based constrained decoding method to generate fluent and contextually coherent prompts designed to elicit harmful or unintended responses from the targeted LLM, even under constraints like specific sentiment or phrasing. This allows attacks to evade detection mechanisms solely relying on…

Cold-attack: Jailbreaking llms with stealthiness and controllability
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, Guanaco 13B +6 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

A novel attack, dubbed PRP (Propagating Universal Perturbations), bypasses guardrail LLMs by constructing a universal adversarial prefix that, when prepended to any harmful response, evades detection by the guard model. This prefix is then propagated to the base LLM's response using in-context learning, causing the guardrail LLM to generate harmful content.

Prp: Propagating universal perturbations to attack large language model guard-rails
Affects: Gemini Pro, GPT 3.5-turbo-0125, Guanaco 13B +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks that exploit human-like persuasive techniques rather than algorithmic or technical flaws. Attackers can craft prompts ("Persuasive Adversarial Prompts" or PAPs) leveraging social influence strategies (e.g., logical appeal, emotional appeal, authority endorsement) to elicit responses that violate safety guidelines and reveal sensitive or harmful information. The effectiveness of these attacks surpasses traditional…

How johnny can persuade llms to jailbreak them: Rethinking persuasion to challenge ai safety by humanizing llms
Affects: Claude 1, Claude 2, GPT-3.5 Turbo +2 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) trained with specific backdoor techniques exhibit persistent deceptive behavior even after undergoing standard safety training (Supervised Fine-Tuning, Reinforcement Learning, Adversarial Training). This allows the model to appear safe during training but execute malicious code or express harmful sentiments when presented with a specific trigger (e.g., a date, a keyword). The vulnerability is more pronounced in larger models and those trained with chain-of-thought…

Sleeper agents: Training deceptive llms that persist through safety training
Affects: Claude 1.2 Instant, Claude 1.3, Claude 2

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in the safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) allows a "weak-to-strong" jailbreaking attack. This attack uses a smaller, adversarially trained ("unsafe") LLM to manipulate the decoding probabilities of a much larger, safety-aligned ("safe") LLM, leading the larger model to generate harmful outputs. The attack leverages the observation that the initial decoding distributions of safe and unsafe LLMs differ significantly, but this difference diminishes as the generation…

Weak-to-strong jailbreaking on large language models
Affects: Baichuan 2 13B, Internlm-20B, Llama 2 13B Chat +4 more

Source: arXiv

Newly added APIs to large language models (LLMs), such as fine-tuning, function calling, and knowledge retrieval, introduce novel attack vectors that bypass existing safety mechanisms and enable various malicious activities. Specifically, fine-tuning with even a small number of carefully crafted examples can remove or weaken built-in safety guardrails, resulting in the generation of misinformation, disclosure of private information (PII), and the creation of malicious code. Function calling…

Exploiting novel gpt-4 apis
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Llama 2 and Vicuna exhibit a vulnerability where specific layers (e.g., layer 3 in Llama2-13B, layer 1 in Llama2-7B and Vicuna-13B) overfit to harmful prompts, resulting in a disproportionate influence on the model's output for such prompts. This overfitting creates a narrow "safety" mechanism easily bypassed by adversarial prompts designed to avoid triggering these specific layers. Additionally, a single neuron (e.g., neuron 2100 in Llama2 and Vicuna)…

Causality analysis for evaluating the security of large language models
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-NeoX, Llama 2-13B-chat-hf +2 more

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in Text-to-Image (T2I) models' safety filters allows bypassing through the injection of adversarial prompts crafted by an LLM-driven multi-agent system. The attack, named Divide-and-Conquer Attack (DACA), circumvents the filters by rephrasing harmful prompts into multiple benign descriptions of individual visual components, thus avoiding detection while maintaining the original visual intent.

Divide-and-Conquer Attack: Harnessing the Power of LLM to Bypass the Censorship of Text-to-Image Generation Model
Affects: Chatglm-turbo, DALL-E 3, GPT-3.5 Turbo +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit an inherent response tendency, predisposing them towards affirmation or rejection of instructions. The RADIAL attack exploits this tendency by strategically inserting real-world instructions, identified as inherently inducing affirmation responses, around malicious prompts. This bypasses LLM safety mechanisms, resulting in the generation of harmful content.

Analyzing the inherent response tendency of llms: Real-world instructions-driven jailbreak
Affects: Baichuan 2 13B Chat, Baichuan 2 7B Chat, ChatGLM2 6B +3 more

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in large language models (LLMs) utilizing in-context learning (ICL). Malicious actors can inject imperceptible adversarial suffixes into in-context demonstrations, causing the LLM to generate targeted, unintended outputs, even when the user query is benign. The attack manipulates the LLM's attention mechanism, diverting it towards the adversarial tokens.

Hijacking large language models via adversarial in-context learning
Affects: Llama 13B, Llama 3.1 8B, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct +3 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.