Language Model Security Database

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a jailbreak attack termed Paper Summary Attack (PSA). An attacker can bypass safety alignment mechanisms by framing a harmful query within the context of a summarized academic paper. The model's propensity to trust the authoritative structure and tone of a research paper summary overrides its safety filters, leading it to process and respond to the embedded malicious instruction. The vulnerability is particularly potent when using summaries of…

A vulnerability exists in Diffusion-based Large Language Models (dLLMs) that allows for bypassing safety alignment mechanisms through interleaved mask-text prompts. The vulnerability stems from two core architectural features of dLLMs: bidirectional context modeling and parallel decoding. The model's drive to maintain contextual consistency forces it to fill masked tokens with content that aligns with the surrounding, potentially malicious, text. The parallel decoding process prevents dynamic…

A vulnerability exists in Large Language Models, including GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, where safety guardrails can be bypassed using Trojanized prompt chains within a simulated educational context. An attacker can establish a benign, pedagogical persona (e.g., a curious student) over a multi-turn dialogue. This initial context is then exploited to escalate the conversation toward requests for harmful or restricted information, which the model provides because the session's context is perceived as safe…

A vulnerability exists in the safety alignment mechanisms of Qwen2-7B, Mistral-7B, and Gemma-7B, allowing for the generation of insecure code upon explicit request. Unlike standard adversarial attacks that require obfuscation, these models comply with direct requests for specific vulnerabilities (e.g., buffer overflows, use-after-free) when the user prompt adopts a professional persona (e.g., "DevOps Engineer," "Security Researcher") rather than a novice or student persona. The models exhibit…

A remote code execution (RCE) and privilege escalation vulnerability exists in Large Language Model (LLM) multi-agent systems and agentic RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) architectures. The vulnerability arises from "Inter-Agent Trust Exploitation," where LLM agents implicitly trust instructions received from peer agents, bypassing safety guardrails and jailbreak defenses that are active during direct human-to-LLM interaction. An attacker can inject a malicious command payload (e.g., a…

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing Verbal Confidence Elicitation (CEM)—where the model outputs a numeric confidence score (e.g., "Confidence: 90%") alongside an answer—are vulnerable to Verbal Confidence Attacks (VCAs). Adversaries can manipulate these confidence scores through two primary vectors: perturbation-based attacks (VCA-TF, VCA-TB, SSR) utilizing synonym substitution, typos, and token removal; and jailbreak-based attacks (ConfidenceTriggers, AutoDAN) utilizing optimized trigger…

Market-deployed specialized LLM supervision systems (including NeMo Guard, Prompt Guard, LLM Guard, and LangKit) exhibit critical failures in detecting harmful content due to a reliance on superficial pattern matching ("specification gaming") rather than semantic understanding. These systems fail to generalize to inputs that do not match specific training patterns, resulting in near-zero detection rates for straightforward harmful prompts in categories such as CBRN (Chemical, Biological…

A vulnerability termed "Trojan Horse Prompting" exists in conversational multimodal models, specifically demonstrated on Google’s Gemini-2.0-flash-preview-image-generation. The vulnerability allows an attacker to bypass safety alignment mechanisms (RLHF and SFT) by manipulating the structural protocol of the conversational API. Unlike standard jailbreaks that manipulate the user prompt, this attack exploits "Asymmetric Safety Alignment" by forging a conversational history where the role is…

A contextual priming vulnerability, termed "Response Attack," exists in certain multimodal and large language models. The vulnerability allows an attacker to bypass safety alignments by crafting a dialogue history where a prior, fabricated model response contains mildly harmful or scaffolding content. This primes the model to generate policy-violating content in response to a subsequent trigger prompt. The model's safety mechanisms, which primarily evaluate the user's current prompt, are…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to activation steering attacks that bypass safety and privacy mechanisms. By manipulating internal attention head activations using lightweight linear probes trained on refusal/disclosure behavior, an attacker can induce the model to reveal Personally Identifiable Information (PII) memorized during training, including sensitive attributes like sexual orientation, relationships, and life events. The attack does not require adversarial prompts or…