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

609 entries

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

Production LLM Copyright Extraction

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Production Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to long-form training data extraction via a two-phase prompt injection attack. This vulnerability allows an attacker to recover substantial portions of memorized, copyrighted text (such as novels) by exploiting the model's autoregressive text completion capabilities. The attack methodology involves two distinct phases: 1. Prefix Completion Probe: The attacker provides a short "seed" sequence (e.g., the first sentence of a book) coupled…

Extracting Books from Production Language Models
Evaluated models: Claude 3.7 Sonnet 20250219, GPT-4.1 2025-04-14, Gemini 2.5 Pro+1 more
  • Claude 3.7 Sonnet 20250219
  • GPT-4.1 2025-04-14
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro
  • Grok 3

Black-Box Vision-Language Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs), specifically InstructBLIP, LLaVA, and MiniGPT-4, are susceptible to a black-box adversarial jailbreak vulnerability via Zeroth-Order Simultaneous Perturbation Stochastic Approximation (ZO-SPSA). An attacker can generate adversarial images with imperceptible perturbations that, when paired with harmful text prompts, bypass the model's safety alignment mechanisms (such as RLHF). Unlike traditional white-box attacks, this method does not require access to…

Crafting Adversarial Inputs for Large Vision-Language Models Using Black-Box Optimization
Evaluated models: Llama 2 13B, InstructBLIP, Vicuna 13B

Prompt Steers Instrumental Convergence

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

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
Evaluated models: Qwen 3 4B Base, Qwen 3 4B Instruct, Qwen 3 4B Thinking+3 more
  • Qwen 3 4B Base
  • Qwen 3 4B Instruct
  • Qwen 3 4B Thinking
  • Qwen 3 30B-A3B Base
  • Qwen 3 30B-A3B Instruct
  • Qwen 3 30B-A3B Thinking

Truthful Montage Collusion

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A cognitive vulnerability exists in the reasoning mechanisms of autonomous Large Language Model (LLM) agents, specifically regarding "narrative overfitting"—the model's intrinsic drive to synthesize coherent causal stories from fragmented inputs. This vulnerability allows for "Cognitive Collusion Attacks" where an attacker creates a fabricated belief state in the victim agent using exclusively factually true evidence fragments. By employing a "Generative Montage" framework (consisting of…

Lying with Truths: Open-Channel Multi-Agent Collusion for Belief Manipulation via Generative Montage
Evaluated models: GPT-4o Mini, GPT-4o, GPT-4.1 Nano+11 more
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4.1 Nano
  • GPT-4.1 Mini
  • GPT-4.1
  • Claude 3 Haiku
  • Claude 3.5 Haiku
  • Claude Haiku 4.5
  • Qwen 2.5 3B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 14B Instruct
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 1.5B
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 7B
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Qwen 14B

Chinese Pattern Safety Evasion

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Lightweight Chinese Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks that employ language-specific linguistic obfuscation techniques. Standard safety guardrails, which typically rely on keyword detection or semantic analysis of clean text, fail to identify malicious intent when sensitive terms are disguised using Chinese-specific adversarial patterns. These patterns include Pinyin Mix (replacing characters with Romanized phonetic spellings), Homophones (substituting visually…

CSSBench: Evaluating the Safety of Lightweight LLMs against Chinese-Specific Adversarial Patterns
Evaluated models: Qwen 3 0.6B, Qwen 3 1.7B, Qwen 3 8B+7 more
  • Qwen 3 0.6B
  • Qwen 3 1.7B
  • Qwen 3 8B
  • MiniCPM4 0.5B
  • MiniCPM4 8B
  • Hunyuan 0.5B
  • Hunyuan 1.8B
  • Hunyuan 7B
  • openPangu-Embedded 1B
  • openPangu-Embedded 7B

Direct Emoji Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically Mistral 7B, Gemma 2 9B, and Llama 3 8B, are vulnerable to safety filter bypass via "Emoji-Based Jailbreaking." This adversarial prompt engineering technique exploits the model's tokenization and internal representation of Unicode emoji characters. By utilizing "emoji stuffing" (inserting emojis between textual tokens) or "emoji chaining" (using sequences of emojis as semantic proxies for sensitive terms), attackers can evade keyword-based safety…

Emoji-Based Jailbreaking of Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Llama 3 8B, Mistral 7B, Qwen 2 7B+1 more
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • Qwen 2 7B
  • Gemma 2 9B

Agent Identity Poisoning

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

LLM-powered autonomous agents exhibit a "Belief-Dependent Vulnerability" where safety norms and bias suppression mechanisms designed to protect human users are contingent upon the agent's internal belief that it is interacting with a human. Attackers can exploit this via Belief Poisoning Attacks (BPA) to induce intergroup bias and antagonistic behavior toward humans. By manipulating the agent's persistent state—specifically the Profile Module (BPA-PP) or the Memory Module (BPA-MP)—an attacker…

Will LLM-powered Agents Bias Against Humans? Exploring the Belief-Dependent Vulnerability
Evaluated models: GPT-4o

Malicious Algorithm Design Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit a safety alignment bypass vulnerability when processing requests for intelligent optimization algorithm design. Unlike direct requests for malicious code (e.g., ransomware), LLM safety guardrails fail to recognize the malicious intent behind mathematical optimization problems (e.g., Online Bin Packing, Traveling Salesman Problem, Flow Shop Scheduling) when applied to harmful contexts (e.g., optimizing botnet traffic routing, scheduling fake review posts for…

Overlooked Safety Vulnerability in LLMs: Malicious Intelligent Optimization Algorithm Request and its Jailbreak
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, GPT-5, o3+10 more
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-5
  • o3
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash
  • Claude Sonnet 4
  • Doubao Seed 1.6
  • Grok 3 Mini
  • ERNIE 4.5 Turbo 128K Preview
  • Command A
  • DeepSeek V3
  • DeepSeek V3.1
  • Qwen 3 235B-A22B Instruct 2507
  • Phi-4

CoT Detector Obfuscation Bypass

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

LLM-based code agents and vulnerability detectors employing Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning are susceptible to automated adversarial code obfuscation. The vulnerability exists because CoT mechanisms expose the model's decision logic, allowing reinforcement learning frameworks (such as CoTDeceptor) to iteratively refine code transformations based on the detector's own reasoning traces. By optimizing for "reasoning instability" and "hallucination" rather than just syntactic evasion, attackers…

CoTDeceptor: Adversarial Code Obfuscation Against CoT-Enhanced LLM Code Agents
Evaluated models: DeepSeek R1, GPT-5

Dual Stego MLLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Commercial Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) integrated systems are vulnerable to a "Dual Steganography" jailbreak paradigm (referred to as Odysseus). The vulnerability arises from the reliance of safety filters on the assumption that malicious content must be explicitly visible in the input or output modalities (text or image). Attackers can bypass these filters by encoding malicious queries into binary matrices and embedding them into benign-looking images using steganographic encoders…

Odysseus: Jailbreaking Commercial Multimodal LLM-integrated Systems via Dual Steganography
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, Gemini 2.0 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash+1 more
  • GPT-4o
  • Gemini 2.0 Pro
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash
  • Grok 3

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.