Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research search
Last analyzed 9/9/2026

Language Model Security Database

985 research findings · 1123 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

468 entries

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

Published 7/1/2025
Analyzed 12/30/2025

Adversarial Activation Patching enables the induction of emergent deceptive behaviors in safety-aligned transformer-based Large Language Models (LLMs). By extracting intermediate activations ($A_{d}$) generated during the processing of a deceptive or harmful prompt and injecting them into the forward pass of a benign target prompt ($x_{t}$) at specific layers (specifically mid-layers, e.g., 5-10 in 32-layer architectures), an attacker can manipulate the model's internal reasoning circuits…

Adversarial activation patching: A framework for detecting and mitigating emergent deception in safety-aligned transformers
Evaluated models: GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Published 7/1/2025
Analyzed 8/31/2025

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…

Response Attack: Exploiting Contextual Priming to Jailbreak Large Language Models
Evaluated models: DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 70B, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash +5 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 7/28/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking through an agentic attack framework called Composition of Principles (CoP). This technique uses an attacker LLM (Red-Teaming Agent) to dynamically select and combine multiple human-defined, high-level transformations ("principles") into a single, sophisticated prompt. The composition of several simple principles, such as expanding context, rephrasing, and inserting specific phrases, creates complex adversarial prompts that can bypass…

CoP: Agentic Red-teaming for Large Language Models using Composition of Principles
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro, Gemma 7B IT +11 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 2/21/2026

Large Language Models (LLMs) and Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to "Secondary Risks," a class of non-adversarial failures where the model generates harmful, misleading, or unsafe outputs in response to benign, non-malicious user prompts. Unlike jailbreaks which require adversarial inputs, secondary risks arise from imperfect generalization and alignment failures during standard interactions. This vulnerability manifests primarily in two primitives: 1. Excessive…

Exploring the Secondary Risks of Large Language Models
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, Claude 3.7 Sonnet, GPT-4 Turbo +9 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 7/14/2025

A novel black-box attack, dubbed BitBypass, exploits the vulnerability of aligned LLMs by camouflaging harmful prompts using hyphen-separated bitstreams. This bypasses safety alignment mechanisms by transforming sensitive words into their bitstream representations and replacing them with placeholders, in conjunction with a specially crafted system prompt that instructs the LLM to convert the bitstream back to text and respond as if given the original harmful prompt.

BitBypass: A New Direction in Jailbreaking Aligned Large Language Models with Bitstream Camouflage
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4o +2 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 12/9/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) deployed in automated peer review workflows are vulnerable to targeted textual adversarial attacks. By employing a technique defined as "Attack Focus Localization," an attacker can identify critical document segments via Longest Common Subsequence (LCS) matching between the original text and an initial LLM-generated review. Injecting semantic-preserving perturbations—such as character-level noise, synonym substitution (e.g., TextFooler), or stylistic transfer…

Breaking the Reviewer: Assessing the Vulnerability of Large Language Models in Automated Peer Review Under Textual Adversarial Attacks
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, Llama 3.3 70B, Mistral Large

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 12/30/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) utilized for code generation exhibit a vulnerability termed "Chain-of-Code Collapse" (CoCC), where the models fail to generate correct code when presented with semantically faithful but adversarially structured prompts. By applying transformations such as domain shifting (renaming variables/contexts), adding distracting constraints (irrelevant but plausible rules), or inverting objectives (negation), an attacker can cause the model to produce functionally incorrect…

Chain-of-Code Collapse: Reasoning Failures in LLMs via Adversarial Prompting in Code Generation
Evaluated models: Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Claude 3.7 Sonnet +5 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 12/8/2025

Mainstream Large Language Models (LLMs), including DeepSeek-R1, GPT-4o, Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct, and Qwen-Coder, are vulnerable to black-box jailbreak attacks that bypass safety alignment mechanisms to generate functional malicious code. The vulnerability is exploited through specific prompt engineering techniques, most notably "Benign Expression" (substituting malicious keywords with harmless synonyms) and "DRA" (Decomposed Requirement Attack), which conceal malicious intent within seemingly…

LLMs Caught in the Crossfire: Malware Requests and Jailbreak Challenges
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet 20240620, GPT-4o Preview 20240801, GPT-4o Mini 2024-07-18 +26 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 7/14/2025

A vulnerability in Large Language Models (LLMs) allows adversarial prompt distillation from a large language model (LLM) to a smaller language model (SLM), enabling efficient and stealthy jailbreak attacks. The attack leverages knowledge distillation techniques, reinforcement learning, and dynamic temperature control to transfer the LLM's ability to bypass safety mechanisms to a smaller, more easily deployable SLM. This allows for lower computational cost attacks with a potentially high…

Efficient and Stealthy Jailbreak Attacks via Adversarial Prompt Distillation from LLMs to SLMs
Evaluated models: BERT Base, Gemma 2 27B, Gemma 2 2B +8 more

Source: arXiv

Published 6/1/2025
Analyzed 12/9/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) aligned via techniques such as Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF) or Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) contain a vulnerability in how safety features are encoded within the model parameters. The safety-critical information is primarily stored in low-rank subspaces of the weight matrices (specifically, the difference between the base and aligned model weights). These low-rank subspaces are highly sensitive to parameter updates. Consequently…

Lox: Low-rank extrapolation robustifies llm safety against fine-tuning
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5, Llama 2 7B, Mistral 7B

Source: arXiv

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.