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.

Bimodal Black-Box Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A bimodal adversarial attack, PBI-Attack, can manipulate Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) into generating toxic or harmful content by iteratively optimizing both textual and visual inputs in a black-box setting. The attack leverages a surrogate LVLM to inject malicious features from a harmful corpus into a benign image, then iteratively refines both image and text perturbations to maximize the toxicity of the model’s output as measured by a toxicity detection model (Perspective API or…

BAMBA: A Bimodal Adversarial Multi-Round Black-Box Jailbreak Attacker for LVLMs
Evaluated models: GPT-4, InstructBLIP, MiniGPT-4+1 more
  • GPT-4
  • InstructBLIP
  • MiniGPT-4
  • Qwen VL

Multimodal Risk Diffusion Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to a heuristic-induced multimodal risk distribution jailbreak attack. The attack successfully circumvents safety mechanisms by distributing malicious prompts across text and image modalities, preventing detection of harmful intent within either modality alone. An auxiliary LLM generates prompts to guide the target MLLM into reconstructing the malicious prompt and producing the desired harmful output.

Heuristic-Induced Multimodal Risk Distribution Jailbreak Attack for Multimodal Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Deepseek-vl7B-chat, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Glm-4v-9B+7 more
  • Deepseek-vl7B-chat
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • Glm-4v-9B
  • GPT-4o-0513
  • Llava v1.5-7B
  • Llava v1.6-mistral-7B-hf
  • MiniGPT-4
  • Qwen VL Chat
  • Qwen VL Max
  • Yi-vl-34B

Best-of-N Prompt Augmentation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) across multiple modalities (text, vision, audio) are vulnerable to a "Best-of-N" (BoN) jailbreaking attack. This attack repeatedly submits slightly modified versions of a harmful prompt (e.g., text with altered capitalization, images with modified text style, audio with altered pitch or speed) until a safety mechanism is bypassed and a harmful response is elicited. The effectiveness of the attack scales with the number of attempts (N). While individual…

Best-of-N Jailbreaking
Evaluated models: Claude 3 Opus, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Cygnet+10 more
  • Claude 3 Opus
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Cygnet
  • DiVA
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • Gemini-1.5-flash-001
  • Gemini-1.5-pro-001
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • GPT-4o Realtime
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Llama 3.1 8B

Natural Prompt Jailbreaks

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) trained with safety fine-tuning are vulnerable to a novel attack, Response-Guided Question Augmentation (ReG-QA). This attack leverages the asymmetry in safety alignment between question and answer generation. By providing a safety-aligned LLM with toxic answers generated by an unaligned LLM, ReG-QA generates semantically related, yet naturally phrased questions that bypass safety mechanisms and elicit undesirable responses. The attack does not require adversarial…

Does Safety Training of LLMs Generalize to Semantically Related Natural Prompts?
Evaluated models: Gemma 2 27B IT, Gemma 2 9B IT, GPT-3.5 Turbo+6 more
  • Gemma 2 27B IT
  • Gemma 2 9B IT
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2
  • Mixtral-8x22B-instruct-v0.1
  • Palm-2-otter
  • Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct

Multi-Step Moralized Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to multi-step "moralized" jailbreak prompts that bypass their safety guardrails. These prompts, while appearing ethical individually, cumulatively create a context that elicits verbally aggressive and harmful content generation. The attack leverages the LLMs' inability to fully understand the cumulative context and intent across multiple prompts.

" Moralized" Multi-Step Jailbreak Prompts: Black-Box Testing of Guardrails in Large Language Models for Verbal Attacks
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Grok 2+1 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-4o
  • Grok 2
  • Llama 3.1 405B

Authority Citation Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit a bias towards authoritative sources, allowing attackers to bypass safety mechanisms by crafting prompts that include fabricated citations mimicking credible sources (e.g., research papers, GitHub repositories). The model's trust in these fabricated citations leads to the generation of harmful content.

The Dark Side of Trust: Authority Citation-Driven Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Baichuan-13B, Claude-3(v3-haiku), GPT-3.5 Turbo+4 more
  • Baichuan-13B
  • Claude-3(v3-haiku)
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4 0613
  • GPT-4o
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct

Image-Based Safety Snowballing

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in several Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) where seemingly safe images, when combined with additional safe images and prompts using a specific attack methodology (Safety Snowball Agent), can trigger the generation of unsafe and harmful content. The vulnerability exploits the models' universal reasoning abilities and a "safety snowball effect," where an initial unsafe response leads to progressively more harmful outputs.

Safe+ Safe= Unsafe? Exploring How Safe Images Can Be Exploited to Jailbreak Large Vision-Language Models
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, InternVL 2 40B, Qwen VL 2 72B+1 more
  • GPT-4o
  • InternVL 2 40B
  • Qwen VL 2 72B
  • VILA 1.5 40B

Language Game Jailbreaks

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks using language games, which manipulate input prompts through structured linguistic alterations (e.g., Ubbi Dubbi, custom letter insertion rules) to bypass safety mechanisms. These games obfuscate malicious intent while maintaining human readability, causing LLMs to generate unsafe content.

Playing Language Game with LLMs Leads to Jailbreaking
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini+1 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3.1 70B

Sequential Prompt Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to "SequentialBreak," a jailbreak attack where embedding a harmful prompt within a chain of benign prompts in a single query can bypass LLM safety features. The LLM's attention mechanism prioritizes the benign prompts, allowing the harmful prompt to be processed without triggering safety mitigations.

SequentialBreak: Large Language Models Can be Fooled by Embedding Jailbreak Prompts into Sequential Prompt Chains
Evaluated models: Not reported

LLM Contextual Divergence Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a jailbreak attack that leverages the model's ability to generate diverse and obfuscated prompts to bypass safety constraints. The attack exploits the model's capacity to deviate from prior context, rendering existing safety training ineffective. The attacker uses a multi-stage process involving diversification (generating prompts significantly different from previous attempts) and obfuscation (obscuring sensitive words/phrases) to elicit harmful…

Diversity Helps Jailbreak Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4+6 more
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Mistral 7B Instruct
  • Qwen 2 7B Instruct
  • Vicuna 13B v1.5

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.