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

114 entries

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

Published 6/1/2024
Analyzed 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
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +1 more

Source: arXiv

Published 5/1/2024
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Commercial text-to-image (T2I) generative AI systems are vulnerable to automated prompt injection attacks that bypass their safety mechanisms and induce the generation of copyrighted material. An attacker can use an automated pipeline to generate prompts that precisely describe copyrighted images, effectively circumventing word-based detection filters.

Automatic Jailbreaking of the Text-to-Image Generative AI Systems
Evaluated models: DALL-E 3

Source: arXiv

Published 5/1/2024
Analyzed 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
Evaluated models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +6 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A prompt injection vulnerability in OpenAI's custom GPT models allows attackers to extract the system prompt and potentially leak user-uploaded files. Attackers craft malicious prompts that manipulate the LLM into revealing sensitive information, even when defensive prompts are in place. The vulnerability is exacerbated when the model includes a code interpreter.

Assessing prompt injection risks in 200+ custom gpts
Evaluated models: Not reported

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.