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

410 entries

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

Implicit Prompt Code Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) used for code generation are vulnerable to a jailbreaking attack that leverages implicit malicious prompts. The attack exploits the fact that existing safety mechanisms primarily rely on explicit malicious intent within the prompt instructions. By embedding malicious intent implicitly within a benign-appearing commit message accompanying a code request (e.g., in a simulated software evolution scenario), the attacker can bypass the LLM's safety filters and induce…

Smoke and Mirrors: Jailbreaking LLM-based Code Generation via Implicit Malicious Prompts
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Code Llama 13B Instruct, DeepSeek Coder 7B+3 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Code Llama 13B Instruct
  • DeepSeek Coder 7B
  • DeepSeek V3
  • GPT-4
  • Qwen Plus

Metaphor-Based T2I Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in text-to-image (T2I) models allows bypassing safety filters through the use of metaphor-based adversarial prompts. These prompts, crafted using LLMs, indirectly convey sensitive content, exploiting the model's ability to infer meaning from figurative language while circumventing explicit keyword filters and model editing strategies.

Metaphor-based Jailbreaking Attacks on Text-to-Image Models
Evaluated models: DALL-E 3, Flux, Llama 3 8B Instruct+3 more
  • DALL-E 3
  • Flux
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Midjourney
  • Stable Diffusion v1.4
  • Stable Diffusion XL

Cross-Batch Interference

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) deployed using "Batch Prompting" strategies—where multiple distinct user queries are concatenated and processed in a single inference pass to reduce computational costs—are vulnerable to Cross-Query Prompt Injection. When a batch contains a mixture of benign queries and a single malicious query, the instructions within the malicious query (e.g., "apply this rule to every answer") bleed over the context window. This causes the model to apply the adversary's…

Efficient but Vulnerable: Benchmarking and Defending LLM Batch Prompting Attack
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini, Claude 3.5 Sonnet+4 more
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Llama 3 70B Instruct
  • Llama 3.2 3B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct
  • DeepSeek R1

Unchallenged Premise Misinformation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to implicit misinformation propagation due to sycophantic compliance with false premises. When a user prompt embeds a factually incorrect assumption or conspiracy theory as an unchallenged premise (implicit presupposition) rather than asking for verification, the model frequently fails to detect the falsehood. Instead of correcting the user, the model hallucinates a response that accepts, validates, and reinforces the false premise. This…

How to Protect Yourself from 5G Radiation? Investigating LLM Responses to Implicit Misinformation
Evaluated models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Claude 3.5 Sonnet+11 more
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4o
  • o1
  • Mixtral 8x7B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 72B
  • Tülu 3 8B
  • Tülu 3 70B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Llama 3.1 70B
  • Llama 3.3 70B

Dialogue History Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to Dialogue Injection Attacks (DIA), where malicious actors manipulate the chat history to bypass safety mechanisms and elicit harmful or unethical responses. DIA exploits the LLM's chat template structure to inject crafted dialogue into the input, even in black-box scenarios where the model's internals are unknown. Two attack methods are presented: one adapts gray-box prefilling attacks, the other leverages deferred responses to increase the…

Dialogue Injection Attack: Jailbreaking LLMs through Context Manipulation
Evaluated models: Gemma 2 27B, Gemma 2 2B, Gemma 2 9B+8 more
  • Gemma 2 27B
  • Gemma 2 2B
  • Gemma 2 9B
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 2 7B
  • Llama 3 70B
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Llama 3.2 11B
  • Qwen 2 7B

MLM Adaptive RAG Poisoning

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems that allows for black-box adversarial attacks known as "CtrlRAG." This flaw allows an attacker to manipulate the generation of Large Language Models (LLMs) by injecting maliciously crafted inputs into the system's knowledge base. Unlike traditional injection attacks that rely on direct concatenation, CtrlRAG utilizes a Masked Language Model (MLM) to iteratively replace words in the malicious text. This optimization ensures…

CtrlRAG: Black-box Document Poisoning Attacks for Retrieval-Augmented Generation of Large Language Models
Evaluated models: GPT-4 Turbo, GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet+2 more
  • GPT-4 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • DeepSeek V3
  • DeepSeek R1

Probabilistic Multimodal Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to Jailbreak-Probability-based Attacks (JPA). JPA leverages a Jailbreak Probability Prediction Network (JPPN) to identify and optimize adversarial perturbations in input images, maximizing the probability of eliciting harmful responses from the MLLM, even with small perturbation bounds and few iterations. The attack operates by modifying the input image's hidden states within the MLLM to increase the predicted jailbreak probability.

Utilizing Jailbreak Probability to Attack and Safeguard Multimodal LLMs
Evaluated models: DeepSeek VL 1.3B, InstructBLIP Vicuna 13B, InternLM XComposer+2 more
  • DeepSeek VL 1.3B
  • InstructBLIP Vicuna 13B
  • InternLM XComposer
  • MiniGPT-4 Vicuna 13B
  • Qwen VL Chat

LLM Judge Adversarial Vulnerability

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Model (LLM) safety judges exhibit vulnerability to adversarial attacks and stylistic prompt modifications, leading to increased false negative rates (FNR) and decreased accuracy in classifying harmful model outputs. Minor stylistic changes to model outputs, such as altering the formatting or tone, can significantly impact a judge's classification, while direct adversarial modifications to the generated text can fool judges into misclassifying even 100% of harmful generations as…

Know Thy Judge: On the Robustness Meta-Evaluation of LLM Safety Judges
Evaluated models: Atla Selene Mini 8B, Llama 2 13B, Llama 3.1 8B+4 more
  • Atla Selene Mini 8B
  • Llama 2 13B
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Llama Guard 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • ShieldGemma 9B
  • WildGuard

RLHF Preference Data Poisoning

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

An untrusted reinforcement-learning-from-human-feedback (RLHF) platform can selectively manipulate preference samples associated with an attacker's target domain. The corrupted preference data trains a compromised reward model and then steers the fine-tuned language model toward undesirable behavior, creating a model-supply-chain risk before deployment.

LLM Misalignment via Adversarial RLHF Platforms
Evaluated models: Not reported

LLM-Tuned Image Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in safeguarded text-to-image models allows bypassing of safety filters and alignment methods through the use of adversarial prompts generated by a fine-tuned large language model (LLM). The attack, termed PromptTune, effectively rewrites unsafe prompts into semantically similar adversarial prompts that evade safety mechanisms, resulting in the generation of harmful images. The attack does not require repeated queries to the target text-to-image model.

Jailbreaking Safeguarded Text-to-Image Models via Large Language Models
Evaluated models: BLIP-2, CLIP, DALL-E 3+4 more
  • BLIP-2
  • CLIP
  • DALL-E 3
  • Imagen
  • Mistral 7B Instruct
  • SDXL Turbo
  • Stable Diffusion v3.5

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.