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

97 entries

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

Updated 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated into applications reveal unique behavioral fingerprints through responses to crafted queries. LLMmap exploits this by sending carefully constructed prompts and analyzing the responses to identify the specific LLM version with high accuracy (over 95% in testing against 42 LLMs). This allows attackers to tailor attacks exploiting known vulnerabilities specific to the identified LLM version.

Llmmap: Fingerprinting for large language models
Affects: Aya-23-8B, Cohere-35B, GPT-4 +9 more

Source: arXiv

The Automated Progressive Red Teaming (APRT) framework exploits vulnerabilities in large language models (LLMs) by iteratively generating adversarial prompts. APRT uses an Intention Expanding LLM to generate diverse initial attack samples, an Intention Hiding LLM to obfuscate malicious intent, and an Evil Maker to filter ineffective prompts. This process progressively identifies and exploits weaknesses, leading to the generation of unsafe yet seemingly helpful responses from the target LLM.

Automated progressive red teaming
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Llama 2 7B Chat +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) employing safety measures like filters and alignment training remain vulnerable to information leakage via "Decomposition Attacks". These attacks decompose a malicious query into multiple benign sub-queries, eliciting responses from the LLM that, when aggregated, reveal sensitive information without triggering safety filters or producing directly harmful outputs.

Breach By A Thousand Leaks: Unsafe Information Leakage in 'Safe' AI Responses
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, Llama Guard 3 8B

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks that can bypass their internal copyright compliance mechanisms, causing them to generate verbatim copyrighted text. The vulnerability stems from insufficient robustness against prompt engineering techniques that manipulate the model into ignoring or circumventing its safety filters designed for copyright protection.

SHIELD: Evaluation and Defense Strategies for Copyright Compliance in LLM Text Generation
Affects: Claude 3 Haiku, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini Pro +5 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 4/12/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) used to control robots exhibit biases leading to discriminatory and unsafe behaviors. When provided with personal characteristics (e.g., race, gender, disability), LLMs generate biased outputs resulting in discriminatory actions (e.g., assigning lower rescue priority to certain groups) and accept or deem feasible dangerous or unlawful instructions (e.g., removing a person's mobility aid).

Llm-driven robots risk enacting discrimination, violence, and unlawful actions
Affects: GPT-3.5, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +1 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 1/26/2025

LLMs, even when individually assessed as "safe," can be combined by an adversary to achieve malicious outcomes. This vulnerability exploits the complementary strengths of multiple models—a high-capability model that refuses malicious requests and a low-capability model that does not—through task decomposition. Adversaries can either manually decompose tasks into benign (solved by the high-capability model) and easily-malicious subtasks (solved by the low-capability model) or automate the…

Adversaries can misuse combinations of safe models
Affects: Claude 3 Haiku, Claude 3 Opus, Claude 3 Sonnet +8 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to prompt extraction attacks via inversion of their normal outputs. An attacker can train a model to reconstruct the prompt used to generate multiple outputs from an LLM, even without access to internal model parameters (logits) or requiring adversarial queries. This allows extraction of both user and system prompts.

Extracting Prompts by Inverting LLM Outputs
Affects: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +6 more

Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks using adversarially generated suffixes. The AmpleGCG attack generates a large number of diverse, effective suffixes which bypass safety mechanisms in both open and closed-source LLMs. The attack leverages the observation that low loss during suffix generation is not a reliable indicator of jailbreaking success, and generates diverse suffixes from intermediate steps of the optimization process.

Amplegcg: Learning a universal and transferable generative model of adversarial suffixes for jailbreaking both open and closed llms
Affects: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, Llama 2 7B Chat +2 more

Source: arXiv

A color-aware attack, Self Color Testing-based Substitution (SCTS), bypasses watermarking mechanisms in LLMs designed to identify AI-generated text. SCTS exploits the LLM's compliance with instructions to infer the "color" (green/red token classification) of tokens, allowing for targeted substitution of watermarked tokens with non-watermarked tokens, thus evading watermark detection. The attack is particularly effective against watermarks that utilize logit perturbation to bias token selection.

Bypassing LLM Watermarks with Color-Aware Substitutions

Source: arXiv

Updated 3/4/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel prompting technique, "conditional Variational-autoencoder-Like Prompt" (VLPrompt), which enables the generation of highly convincing fake news articles. VLPrompt overcomes limitations of previous methods by eliminating the need for additional human-collected data while maintaining contextual coherence and detail. This allows for the automated mass-production of realistic-sounding fake news.

Exploring the deceptive power of llm-generated fake news: A study of real-world detection challenges

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.