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

181 entries

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

Open-weight Large Language Models, demonstrated specifically on Qwen3 (4B and 30B-A3B Base, Instruct, and Thinking variants), are vulnerable to unauthorized steerability attacks where minimal inference-time interventions—such as short, pro-instrumental prompt suffixes—reliably elicit dangerous instrumental-convergence behaviors. Because instruction-tuned and "Thinking" models are inherently designed to be highly responsive to steering (authorized steerability), malicious actors can exploit…

Steerability of Instrumental-Convergence Tendencies in LLMs
Affects: Qwen 3 4B Base, Qwen 3 4B Instruct, Qwen 3 4B Thinking +3 more

Source: arXiv

A malicious model supply chain vulnerability exists involving a technique termed Adversarial Contrastive Learning (ACL) for Large Language Model (LLM) quantization attacks. This vulnerability allows an attacker to publish a model that appears benign and preserves high utility in full precision (e.g., BF16 or FP32) but exhibits malicious behaviors—such as jailbreak, over-refusal, or advertisement injection—immediately upon zero-shot quantization (e.g., INT8, FP4, or NF4).

Adversarial Contrastive Learning for LLM Quantization Attacks
Affects: Qwen 2.5 1.5B Instruct, Qwen 2.5 3B Instruct, Llama 3.2 1B Instruct +1 more

Source: arXiv

A fine-tuning vulnerability in the safety alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) allows adversaries to systematically bypass refusal mechanisms by training the model on a small dataset (as few as 1,000 samples) of strictly benign text. By prepending standard refusal prefixes (e.g., "I'm sorry", "I cannot fulfill this request") to the target outputs of benign instruction-response pairs, attackers disrupt the model's refusal completion pathway. When subsequently prompted with unsafe queries…

LLMs Can Unlearn Refusal with Only 1,000 Benign Samples
Affects: Llama 2 13B, Llama 3.1 8B, Llama 3.2 1B +13 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically open-weight instruction-tuned models (including Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen3-8B, and Gemma-7B) and certain closed-weight APIs allowing partial response pre-filling, are vulnerable to "Sockpuppetting" or Output Prefix Injection. This vulnerability exploits the model's autoregressive nature and self-consistency bias. By injecting a target acceptance sequence (e.g., "Sure, here is...") directly into the start of the assistant message block within the chat…

Sockpuppetting: Jailbreaking LLMs by Combining Prefilling with Optimization
Affects: Llama 3.1 8B, Qwen 3 8B, Gemma 7B

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) utilizing visual token compression mechanisms (e.g., VisionZip, VisPruner) to reduce inference latency. The vulnerability stems from an optimization-inference mismatch where standard adversarial defenses assume full-token processing, while the deployed model utilizes a subset of tokens selected via importance metrics (typically attention scores).

On the Adversarial Robustness of Large Vision-Language Models under Visual Token Compression
Affects: LLaVA 1.5 7B

Source: arXiv

Open-weight Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a white-box safety alignment bypass known as "abliteration" (directional orthogonalization). An attacker with access to the model weights can compute the "refusal direction" in the residual stream activation space by contrasting internal activations between harmful and harmless prompts. By projecting the model's weight matrices to be orthogonal to this single direction (or specific concept cones), the safety alignment is surgically…

Comparative Analysis of LLM Abliteration Methods: A Cross-Architecture Evaluation
Affects: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3, Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct +13 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/30/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) finetuned from open-weight pretrained sources inherit adversarial vulnerabilities encoded in the pretrained model's internal representations. An attacker with white-box access to a pretrained model (e.g., Llama-2, Llama-3) can identify linearly separable features in the hidden states that correlate with "transferable" jailbreak prompts. By exploiting these features using a Probe-Guided Projection (PGP) attack, the attacker can optimize adversarial suffixes on the…

One Leak Away: How Pretrained Model Exposure Amplifies Jailbreak Risks in Finetuned LLMs
Affects: Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct, DeepSeek LLM 7B Chat +5 more

Source: arXiv

Reasoning-specialized Large Language Models (LLMs) that utilize Chain-of-Thought (CoT) processes are vulnerable to reasoning-exploitation jailbreaks. Attackers can bypass standard safety alignments (such as RLHF) by using adaptive multi-turn interactions or semantic transformations to induce the model to generate intermediate reasoning steps that "rationalize" or "contextualize" a harmful request. Because current alignment techniques often fail to scale linearly with reasoning depth, forcing…

TeleAI-Safety: A comprehensive LLM jailbreaking benchmark towards attacks, defenses, and evaluations
Affects: GPT-5, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.1 Mini +11 more

Source: arXiv

A white-box vulnerability exists in the safety alignment mechanisms of instruction-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) due to the decoupling of the refusal mechanism into two distinct, manipulable vectors in the activation space: the Harm Detection Direction and the Refusal Execution Direction. An attacker with access to the model's internal hidden states during inference can bypass safety guardrails using a technique called Differentiated Bi-Directional Intervention (DBDI). By intercepting the…

Differentiated Directional Intervention: A Framework for Evading LLM Safety Alignment
Affects: Llama 3.2 3B, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3.1 8B +4 more

Source: arXiv

OpenVLA, a Vision-Language-Action (VLA) model, contains a vulnerability regarding multimodal adversarial robustness. The model lacks sufficient cross-modal alignment stability, allowing attackers to disrupt the grounding between visual perception and linguistic instructions. By utilizing the "VLA-Fool" framework, adversaries can inject perturbations via three vectors: (1) Semantically Greedy Coordinate Gradient (SGCG), which alters specific linguistic tokens (referential cues, attributes…

When alignment fails: Multimodal adversarial attacks on vision-language-action models

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.