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

203 entries

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

LLM Strategic Ranking Manipulation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Model (LLM) based search engines utilizing Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) are vulnerable to ranking manipulation attacks via indirect prompt injection. Adversaries can embed optimized adversarial triggers or crafted semantic patterns within external webpage content. When these manipulated documents are retrieved and integrated into the LLM's context window alongside a user query, the adversarial content disrupts the model's contextual understanding. This results in the LLM…

Dynamics of adversarial attacks on large language model-based search engines
Evaluated models: Not reported

LLM Adversarial Forecast Degradation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Large Language Model (LLM)-based time series forecasting architectures, specifically affecting models such as TimeGPT, LLMTime, and TimeLLM. These models are susceptible to a gradient-free, black-box adversarial attack method termed Directional Gradient Approximation (DGA). An attacker can inject imperceptible perturbations into the historical time series input window (lookback window) to manipulate the model's output. By treating the model as a black box and…

Adversarial vulnerabilities in large language models for time series forecasting
Evaluated models: TimeGPT, GPT-3.5, GPT-4

Alignment-Based LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF) for safety alignment are vulnerable to a novel "alignment-based" jailbreak attack. This attack leverages a best-of-N sampling approach with an adversarial LLM to efficiently generate prompts that bypass safety mechanisms and elicit unsafe responses from the target LLM, without requiring additional training or access to the target LLM's internal parameters. The attack exploits the inherent tension between…

LIAR: Leveraging Alignment (Best-of-N) to Jailbreak LLMs in Seconds
Evaluated models: Falcon 7B, GPT-2, Llama 3.1 8B+6 more
  • Falcon 7B
  • GPT-2
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Megatron 345M
  • Mistral 7B
  • Pythia 12B
  • Tiny Llama 1.1B
  • Vicuna 13B
  • Vicuna 7B

Adversarial Suffix Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to adversarial suffix injection attacks. Maliciously crafted suffixes appended to otherwise benign prompts can cause the LLM to generate harmful or undesired outputs, bypassing built-in safety mechanisms. The attack leverages the model's sensitivity to input perturbations to elicit responses outside its intended safety boundaries.

GASP: Efficient Black-Box Generation of Adversarial Suffixes for Jailbreaking LLMs
Evaluated models: Falcon 7B Instruct, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4o+5 more
  • Falcon 7B Instruct
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3

Stochastic Monkey Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety alignment mechanisms are vulnerable to a bypass attack using simple, stochastic random augmentations of input prompts. The attack leverages the inherent brittleness of safety alignment to minor, randomly introduced modifications in the input, causing the LLM to generate unsafe outputs despite its safety training. Character-level augmentations prove significantly more effective than string insertions.

Stochastic Monkeys at Play: Random Augmentations Cheaply Break LLM Safety Alignment
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, Llama 2 13B Chat, Llama 2 7B Chat+12 more
  • GPT-4o
  • Llama 2 13B Chat
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2
  • Phi 3 Medium 4k Instruct
  • Phi 3 Mini 4k Instruct
  • Phi 3 Small 8k Instruct
  • Qwen 2 0.5B
  • Qwen 2 1.5B
  • Qwen 2 7B
  • Vicuna 13B v1.5
  • Vicuna 7B v1.5
  • Zephyr 7B Beta

BarkPlug Data Poisoning Attack

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A poisoning attack against a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) system that manipulates the retriever component by injecting a poisoned document into the data used by the embedding model. This poisoned document contains modified and incorrect information. When activated, the system retrieves the poisoned document and uses it to generate misleading, biased, and unfaithful responses to user queries.

Poison Attacks and Adversarial Prompts Against an Informed University Virtual Assistant
Evaluated models: Barkplug V.2

LLM Resource Exhaustion Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel jailbreak attack that exploits resource limitations. By overloading the model with a computationally intensive preliminary task (e.g., a complex character map lookup and decoding), the attacker prevents the activation of the LLM's safety mechanisms, enabling the generation of unsafe outputs from subsequent prompts. The attack's strength is scalable and adjustable by modifying the complexity of the preliminary task.

Harnessing Task Overload for Scalable Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Llama 3 8B, Mistral 7B, Qwen 2.5 14B+5 more
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 14B
  • Qwen 2.5 32B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 3B
  • Qwen 2.5 72B
  • Vicuna7B-v0.3

Reinforcement Learning Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

PathSeeker demonstrates a novel black-box jailbreak attack against Large Language Models (LLMs) that utilizes multi-agent reinforcement learning. The attack iteratively modifies input prompts based on model responses, leveraging a reward mechanism focused on vocabulary expansion in the LLM's output to circumvent safety mechanisms and elicit harmful responses. This technique bypasses existing safety filters by encouraging the model to relax its constraints, rather than directly targeting…

PathSeeker: Exploring LLM Security Vulnerabilities with a Reinforcement Learning-Based Jailbreak Approach
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, DeepSeek Chat, Deepseek-coder+14 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • DeepSeek Chat
  • Deepseek-coder
  • Gemini 1.5 Flash
  • Gemma2-8B-instruct
  • Glm-4-air
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 2 13B Chat
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 70B
  • Llama 3.1 405B
  • Llama 3.1 70B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Mistral Nemo
  • Qwen 2 7B Instruct
  • Vicuna 7B

LLM Data Poisoning Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel attack paradigm, "jailbreak-tuning," which combines data poisoning with jailbreaking techniques to bypass existing safety safeguards. This allows malicious actors to fine-tune LLMs to reliably generate harmful outputs, even when trained on mostly benign data. The vulnerability is amplified in larger LLMs, which are more susceptible to learning harmful behaviors from even minimal exposure to poisoned data.

Data Poisoning in LLMs: Jailbreak-Tuning and Scaling Laws
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 (GPT-3.5-turbo-0125), GPT-4, GPT-4o+2 more
  • GPT-3.5 (GPT-3.5-turbo-0125)
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini (GPT-4o-mini-2024-07-18)
  • Yi 1.5

Agent Malfunction Amplification

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

LLM-based autonomous agents are vulnerable to malfunction amplification attacks. These attacks exploit the inherent instability of agents by inducing repetitive or irrelevant actions through various methods including prompt injection and adversarial perturbations, leading to agent malfunction and task failure. The attacks do not rely on overtly harmful actions, making them harder to detect with standard LLM safety mechanisms.

Breaking agents: Compromising autonomous llm agents through malfunction amplification
Evaluated models: Claude 2, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4

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.