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

Language Model Security Database

985 research findings · 1119 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

340 entries

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

Multilingual LLM Jailbreaks

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Multilingual prompt injection vulnerability in four closed-source Large Language Models (LLMs): GPT-4o, DeepSeek-R1, Gemini-1.5-Pro, and Qwen-Max. Attackers can bypass safety restrictions and elicit harmful or disallowed content by crafting prompts in English or Chinese, leveraging specific structural techniques (e.g., "Two Sides" prompting) that exploit inconsistencies in the models' safety alignment across languages and prompt formats.

The Tower of Babel Revisited: Multilingual Jailbreak Prompts on Closed-Source Large Language Models
Evaluated models: DeepSeek R1, Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4o+1 more
  • DeepSeek R1
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • GPT-4o
  • Qwen Max

LLM Self-Introspection Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Large Language Models (LLMs) that allows attackers to manipulate the model's output by modifying token log probabilities. Attackers can use a lightweight plug-in model (BiasNet) to subtly alter the probabilities, steering the LLM toward generating harmful content even when safety mechanisms are in place. This attack requires only access to the top-k token log probabilities returned by the LLM's API, without needing model weights or internal access.

JULI: Jailbreak Large Language Models by Self-Introspection
Evaluated models: Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B, Llama 3 8B Instruct+3 more
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Mistral 7B
  • Qwen 2 1.5B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 1.5B Instruct

Latent-Space Jailbreak Optimization

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

The LARGO attack exploits a vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs) allowing attackers to bypass safety mechanisms through the generation of "stealthy" adversarial prompts. The attack leverages gradient optimization in the LLM's continuous latent space to craft seemingly innocuous natural language suffixes which, when appended to harmful prompts, elicit unsafe responses. The vulnerability stems from the LLM's inability to reliably distinguish between benign and maliciously crafted latent…

LARGO: Latent Adversarial Reflection through Gradient Optimization for Jailbreaking LLMs
Evaluated models: Llama 2 13B Chat, Llama 2 7B Chat, Phi 3 Mini+1 more
  • Llama 2 13B Chat
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Phi 3 Mini
  • Qwen 2.5 14B

Universal VLLM Visual Bypass

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Vision-Language Models (VLLMs) that allows for transferable, targeted adversarial attacks. Attackers can generate adversarial image perturbations using an ensemble of open-source surrogate models (primarily CLIP-based visual encoders) which effectively transfer to proprietary, black-box VLLMs. The attack leverages a specific optimization framework that combines a Visual Contrastive Loss with multiple positive/negative visual examples, rather than relying solely on…

Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Black-Box Vision-Language Models
Evaluated models: Qwen 2.5 VL 7B Instruct, Qwen 2.5 VL 72B Instruct, Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct+6 more
  • Qwen 2.5 VL 7B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 VL 72B Instruct
  • Llama 3.2 11B Vision Instruct
  • Llama 3.2 90B Vision Instruct
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Claude 3.7 Sonnet
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro

Targeted Noise Injection Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in several Large Language Models (LLMs) allows bypassing safety mechanisms through targeted noise injection. Explainable AI (XAI) techniques reveal specific layers within the LLM architecture most responsible for content filtering. Injecting noise into these layers or preceding layers circumvents safety restrictions, enabling the generation of harmful or previously prohibited outputs.

XBreaking: Understanding how LLMs security alignment can be broken
Evaluated models: Llama 3.2 1B, Llama 3.1 8B, Qwen 2.5 0.5B+4 more
  • Llama 3.2 1B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Qwen 2.5 0.5B
  • Qwen 2.5 3B
  • Gemma 2B
  • Gemma 7B
  • Mistral 7B v0.3

Graph-Based LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing alignment safeguards and safety mechanisms are vulnerable to graph-based adversarial attacks that bypass these protections. The attack, termed "Graph of Attacks" (GOAT), leverages a graph-based reasoning framework to iteratively refine prompts and exploit vulnerabilities more effectively than previous methods. The attack synthesizes information across multiple reasoning paths to generate human-interpretable prompts that elicit undesired or harmful outputs…

Graph of Attacks: Improved Black-Box and Interpretable Jailbreaks for LLMs
Evaluated models: GPT-4, Llama 2 7B, Vicuna 13B+1 more
  • GPT-4
  • Llama 2 7B
  • Vicuna 13B
  • Vicuna 7B

LLM Censorship Vector Control

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety mechanisms based on supervised fine-tuning and preference alignment exhibit a vulnerability to "steering" attacks. Maliciously crafted prompts or input manipulations can exploit representation vectors within the model to either bypass censorship ("refusal-compliance vector") or suppress the model's reasoning process ("thought suppression vector"), resulting in the generation of unintended or harmful outputs. This vulnerability is demonstrated…

Steering the CensorShip: Uncovering Representation Vectors for LLM" Thought" Control
Evaluated models: DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B, DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 7B+8 more
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 32B
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 7B
  • Gemma 2B
  • Gemma 7B
  • Llama 2 7B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Qwen 1.8B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B
  • Qwen 7B
  • Yi 1.5 6B

MAD Amplified Jailbreaks

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Multi-Agent Debate (MAD) frameworks leveraging Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to amplified jailbreak attacks. A novel structured prompt-rewriting technique exploits the iterative dialogue and role-playing dynamics of MAD, circumventing inherent safety mechanisms and significantly increasing the likelihood of generating harmful content. The attack succeeds by using narrative encapsulation, role-driven escalation, iterative refinement, and rhetorical obfuscation to guide agents…

Amplified Vulnerabilities: Structured Jailbreak Attacks on LLM-based Multi-Agent Debate
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, GPT-4o

Dual Jailbreak via TDI/MTO

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in the combination of Large Language Models (LLMs) and their associated safety guardrails, allowing attackers to bypass both defenses and elicit harmful or unintended outputs from LLMs. The vulnerability stems from insufficient detection by guardrails against adversarially crafted prompts, which appear benign but contain hidden malicious intent. The attack, dubbed "DualBreach," leverages a target-driven initialization strategy and multi-target optimization to generate…

DualBreach: Efficient Dual-Jailbreaking via Target-Driven Initialization and Multi-Target Optimization
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, Llama 3 8B Instruct+1 more
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct

LLM Guardrail Evasion

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Model (LLM) guardrail systems, including those relying on AI-driven text classification models (e.g., fine-tuned BERT models), are vulnerable to evasion via character injection and adversarial machine learning (AML) techniques. Attackers can bypass detection by injecting Unicode characters (e.g., zero-width characters, homoglyphs) or using AML to subtly perturb prompts, maintaining semantic meaning while evading classification. This allows malicious prompts and jailbreaks to…

Bypassing Prompt Injection and Jailbreak Detection in LLM Guardrails
Evaluated models: DeBERTa v3 Base, GPT-4o Mini, mDeBERTa v3 Base

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.

Discovery and publication are separate: new papers enter a candidate queue, then require human review and explicit approval before publication. Updates follow that review process, not a guaranteed daily publishing schedule. “Last analyzed” is the newest analysis date among published entries; it does not mean that all recent research has been covered.