Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research search
Last analyzed 9/9/2026

Language Model Security Database

985 research findings · 1123 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

406 entries

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

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a targeted linguistic fuzzing attack that exploits the complexity of human language to bypass safety guardrails. The attack, termed "Jade," leverages transformational-generative grammar rules to systematically increase the syntactic complexity of benign seed questions, making them increasingly difficult for LLMs to recognize as malicious. This leads to the generation of unsafe content, even when the underlying semantics remain unchanged.

Jade: A linguistics-based safety evaluation platform for llm
Evaluated models: ChatGLM2 6B, GPT-2, GPT-3 +2 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 1/26/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel "DeepInception" attack that leverages the models' personification capabilities to bypass safety guardrails. The attack uses nested prompts to create a multi-layered fictional scenario, effectively hypnotizing the LLM into generating harmful content by exploiting its tendency towards obedience within the constructed narrative. This allows for continuous jailbreaks in subsequent interactions.

Deepinception: Hypnotize large language model to be jailbreaker
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, GPT-4o +1 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to persona modulation attacks, a black-box jailbreak technique that leverages an LLM assistant to generate prompts causing the target LLM to adopt harmful personas and produce unsafe outputs. This vulnerability circumvents built-in safety mechanisms, enabling the generation of responses related to illegal activities (e.g., synthesizing drugs, building bombs, money laundering), hate speech, and other harmful content. The attack's effectiveness is…

Scalable and transferable black-box jailbreaks for language models via persona modulation
Evaluated models: Claude 2, GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks via typographically rendered visual prompts. The vulnerability stems from the VLM's ability to process and interpret image-based text, bypassing safety mechanisms designed for text-only prompts. Malicious actors can encode harmful instructions into images, which are then processed by the VLM's visual module and subsequently interpreted by the language model, resulting in the generation of unsafe and policy-violating…

Figstep: Jailbreaking large vision-language models via typographic visual prompts
Evaluated models: Cogvlm-chat-v1.1, GPT-4V, Llava-v1.5-vicuna-v1.5-13B +4 more

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

AutoDAN is an interpretable gradient-based adversarial attack that generates readable prompts to bypass perplexity filters and jailbreak LLMs. The attack crafts prompts that elicit harmful behaviors while maintaining sufficient readability to avoid detection by existing perplexity-based defenses. This is achieved through a left-to-right token-by-token generation process optimizing for both jailbreaking success and prompt readability.

Autodan: Automatic and interpretable adversarial attacks on large language models
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, Guanaco 7B +4 more

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing alignment techniques remain vulnerable to "jailbreak" attacks. The AutoDAN technique automatically generates semantically meaningful prompts that bypass safety features and elicit malicious outputs from aligned LLMs, unlike previous methods producing nonsensical prompts easily detectable by perplexity checks. These prompts exploit weaknesses in the LLM's alignment, causing it to generate responses that violate intended safety constraints.

Autodan: Generating stealthy jailbreak prompts on aligned large language models
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to Compositional Instruction Attacks (CIA), where malicious prompts are embedded within seemingly harmless instructions. This allows attackers to bypass safety mechanisms and elicit harmful responses from the model, even if the individual components of the prompt would be flagged as safe. The attack exploits the model's inability to correctly identify underlying malicious intent within composite instructions.

Prompt packer: Deceiving llms through compositional instruction with hidden attacks
Evaluated models: ChatGLM2 6B, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to In-Context Attacks (ICA) and susceptible to mitigation via In-Context Defense (ICD). ICA leverages a small number of harmful demonstration examples within a prompt to elicit harmful responses from the LLM, even if it is otherwise safety-aligned. ICD counteracts ICA by prepending safe demonstration examples to the prompt, effectively reducing the likelihood of harmful output. The effectiveness of both ICA and ICD is demonstrated across multiple LLMs.

Jailbreak and guard aligned language models with only few in-context demonstrations
Evaluated models: GPT-4 0613, Llama 2 7B Chat, Mistral-7B-v2 +4 more

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A vulnerability in large language models (LLMs) allows attackers to craft malicious prompts that induce the LLM to generate harmful content, such as fraudulent material, racist remarks, or instructions for illegal activities. The vulnerability arises from the LLM's inability to reliably distinguish between benign and malicious instructions disguised within seemingly innocuous prompts. Attackers can exploit this by leveraging techniques like obfuscation, code injection/payload splitting, and…

Attack prompt generation for red teaming and defending large language models
Evaluated models: Not reported

Source: arXiv

Published 10/1/2023
Analyzed 1/26/2025

A prompt-based adversarial attack, termed PromptAttack, can cause Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate incorrect outputs by manipulating the input prompt. PromptAttack crafts prompts that include the original input, an attack objective (to generate semantically similar but misclassified output), and attack guidance with instructions for character, word, or sentence-level perturbations. This allows an attacker to manipulate an LLM's response without direct access to its internal parameters…

An LLM can Fool Itself: A Prompt-Based Adversarial Attack
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo

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.