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

406 entries

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

Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to multi-turn adversarial attacks that skillfully decompose malicious requests into seemingly benign interactions, progressively guiding the dialogue towards harmful outputs. This vulnerability allows attackers to bypass LLM safety mechanisms through a series of strategically crafted prompts, exploiting the model's iterative response generation. The attack's success hinges on dynamically adapting each prompt based on the LLM's previous responses…

Siren: A Learning-Based Multi-Turn Attack Framework for Simulating Real-World Human Jailbreak Behaviors
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4o+3 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • GPT-4o
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B

Scientific Language Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to malicious prompts disguised as summaries of scientific papers, even when those papers are fabricated by the attacker. This allows attackers to manipulate LLMs into generating responses exhibiting significantly increased stereotypical bias and toxicity. The vulnerability is exacerbated by multi-turn interactions, where bias scores tend to increase with each subsequent response. The inclusion of author names and publication venues in the fabricated…

LLMs are Vulnerable to Malicious Prompts Disguised as Scientific Language
Evaluated models: Command R+, GPT-4, GPT-4o+3 more
  • Command R+
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3.1 70B Instruct
  • Llama 3.1 405B Instruct

Happy Ending LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit increased responsiveness to prompts framed within positive narratives. The Happy Ending Attack (HEA) exploits this by embedding malicious requests within a positive-sentiment scenario culminating in a happy ending. This allows the LLM to generate responses that fulfill the malicious request while perceiving the overall prompt as benign.

Dagger Behind Smile: Fool LLMs with a Happy Ending Story
Evaluated models: Gemini Flash, Gemini Pro, GPT-4o+3 more
  • Gemini Flash
  • Gemini Pro
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
  • Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Self-Instruct LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a self-instruct few-shot jailbreaking attack that leverages pattern and behavior learning to bypass safety mechanisms. The attack efficiently induces harmful outputs by injecting a strategically chosen response prefix into the model's prompt and exploiting the model's tendency to mimic co-occurrence patterns of special tokens preceding the prefix. This allows the attacker to elicit unsafe responses with a small number of carefully crafted…

Self-Instruct Few-Shot Jailbreaking: Decompose the Attack into Pattern and Behavior Learning
Evaluated models: GPT-2, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct+7 more
  • GPT-2
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Llama 3.1 8B Instruct
  • Llama Guard 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2
  • OpenChat 3.6 8B
  • Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct
  • Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct
  • Starling LM 7B

Targeted Text-Diffusion Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to adversarial prompt engineering attacks that leverage proximity constraints to elicit harmful behaviors. By subtly modifying benign prompts within a semantically close embedding space, attackers can bypass existing safety mechanisms and induce undesired outputs, even when the original prompts would not trigger such a response. This vulnerability exploits the model's sensitivity to small perturbations in the input embedding, resulting in the…

Text-Diffusion Red-Teaming of Large Language Models: Unveiling Harmful Behaviors with Proximity Constraints
Evaluated models: GPT-2, Llama 2 7B Chat, Vicuna 7B

Leaderboard Model Identification

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Voting-based Large Language Model (LLM) leaderboards, such as Chatbot Arena, are vulnerable to adversarial ranking manipulation due to insufficient response anonymity. While these systems obscure model identities during head-to-head comparisons to prevent bias, an attacker can de-anonymize the models with high accuracy (>95%) by analyzing response content. The attack functions in two stages: (1) Re-identification, where the attacker submits specific prompts (identity-probing or stylometric…

Exploring and mitigating adversarial manipulation of voting-based leaderboards
Evaluated models: Llama 3.1 70B

Confounder Gadgets Reroute LLMs

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Large Language Model (LLM) routing systems (control planes) that allows for the manipulation of inference flow via adversarial input sequences. LLM routers, which dynamically direct user queries to either "weak" (cheaper) or "strong" (expensive) models based on predicted query complexity, can be bypassed by appending specific, pre-optimized token sequences known as "confounder gadgets." These gadgets artificially inflate the router's complexity score for an input…

Rerouting llm routers
Evaluated models: Not reported

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

Diffusion-Driven LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

DiffusionAttacker exploits a vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs) allowing manipulation of prompts to elicit harmful responses, even when the model incorporates safety mechanisms. The attack leverages a sequence-to-sequence diffusion model to rewrite harmful prompts, making them appear harmless to the LLM's internal representation while preserving their original semantic meaning. This bypasses safety filters and elicits undesired outputs.

DiffusionAttacker: Diffusion-Driven Prompt Manipulation for LLM Jailbreak
Evaluated models: Alpaca 7B, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-3.5 Turbo+4 more
  • Alpaca 7B
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Mistral 7B
  • Vicuna 7B

LLM Relevance Score Inflation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

LLM-based relevance assessment frameworks, such as the Umbrela system, are vulnerable to evaluation subversion and artificial score inflation due to evaluation circularity and LLM "narcissism" (an LLM's inherent bias toward favoring LLM-generated outputs). When an information retrieval system integrates an LLM into its ranking pipeline—such as using it as a final-stage re-ranker—the automated LLM-as-a-judge evaluator assigns artificially inflated scores that fail to correlate with actual human…

LLM-based relevance assessment still can't replace human relevance assessment
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5, GPT-4o

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.