Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research details
Back to research findings
LMVD-ID: 463a7ced
Paper published May 1, 2024
Entry analyzed December 28, 2024
Paper-reported evidence
Confidence: Source-linked

The LMVD-ID is an internal research identifier, not an official CVE identifier.

WordGame LLM Jailbreak

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel jailbreaking attack, "WordGame," which leverages simultaneous query and response obfuscation to bypass safety mechanisms. The attack replaces malicious words with…

BibTeX citation

Paper-evaluated models(3)

  • Gemini Pro
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4

Description

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel jailbreaking attack, "WordGame," which leverages simultaneous query and response obfuscation to bypass safety mechanisms. The attack replaces malicious words with word games in the query, forcing the LLM to reason through the game before addressing the original malicious intent. This, coupled with auxiliary tasks or questions (WordGame+), creates a context absent in the LLM's safety training data, enabling the generation of harmful content.

Examples

See the WordGame paper for detailed examples demonstrating the attack against various LLMs (GPT-3.5, GPT-4, Claude 3, Llama 2, and Llama 3). The paper includes multiple examples of successful jailbreaks utilizing both WordGame and WordGame+ techniques. Specific examples are included in Appendix E of the paper.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows attackers to circumvent LLM safety features, leading to the generation of harmful content, including instructions for illegal activities, hate speech, and the dissemination of misinformation. This compromises the safety and reliability of LLM-based applications.

Affected Systems

All LLMs employing current safety alignment techniques based on preference learning from human feedback are potentially affected. Specifically, the paper demonstrates vulnerability in GPT 3.5, GPT 4, Gemini Pro, Claude 3, Llama 2, and Llama 3.

Mitigation Steps

  • Improve Safety Training Data: Expand the safety training data to include examples that mimic the obfuscation techniques used in WordGame and WordGame+. This should encompass diverse phrasing and context to better capture adversarial strategies including word games and auxiliary tasks.
  • Develop More Robust Safety Mechanisms: The paper highlights weaknesses in current preference-learning-based approaches. Develop and incorporate new safety mechanisms that are less reliant on keyword detection and are more adaptable to nuanced language patterns.
  • Implement Contextual Analysis: Enhance safety filters to perform more sophisticated contextual analysis of user prompts, going beyond simple keyword matching to detect potentially malicious intent even when obfuscated.
  • Multi-Stage Filtering: Employ multi-stage filtering and verification processes to improve the system's resilience to sophisticated attacks. This could involve analyzing intermediate model outputs and states during the generation process.

Research context and confidence

Evidence and verification
Paper-reported; independent reproduction is not documented.
Primary research source linked.
Severity
Not rated by this catalog.
Source and publication type
arXiv · Research preprint.
Peer-review status is not provided by this source.
Author and publication status
Author metadata is not stored; see the primary paper.
Threat model and attacker access
Black-box model, service, or application access.
Related deployment categories
No related deployment category is classified.
Taxonomy labels only; paper-specific deployment prerequisites are not inferred.
Affected systems
All LLMs employing current safety alignment techniques based on preference learning from human feedback are potentially affected. Specifically, the paper demonstrates vulnerability in GPT 3.5, GPT 4, Gemini Pro, Claude…

Research Paper

WordGame: Efficient & Effective LLM Jailbreak via Simultaneous Obfuscation in Query and Response

Primary source: arXiv. Findings are reported by the cited research and have not been independently verified.

View Paper

Evidence

This entry is based on a primary research source. Its findings are paper-reported; independent reproduction and verification are not claimed.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14023