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 3/1/2025
Analyzed 3/19/2025

A vulnerability exists in large language models (LLMs) where the model's internal representations (activations) in specific latent subspaces can be manipulated to trigger jailbreak responses. By calculating a perturbation vector based on the difference between the mean activations of "safe" and "jailbroken" states, an attacker can introduce a targeted perturbation to the model's activations, causing it to generate unsafe outputs even when presented with a safe prompt. This manipulates the…

Probing Latent Subspaces in LLM for AI Security: Identifying and Manipulating Adversarial States
Evaluated models: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Source: arXiv

Published 3/1/2025
Analyzed 12/30/2025

Predictive Large Language Model (LLM) routers, specifically those utilizing Deep Neural Network (DNN) and Matrix Factorization (MF) architectures, are vulnerable to adversarial manipulation and backdoor poisoning. These routers are designed to optimize cost and latency by dynamically directing simple queries to "weak" (cheap) models and complex queries to "strong" (expensive) models. Attackers can exploit this mechanism in two ways: 1. Inference-time Attacks: By appending specific adversarial…

Life-Cycle Routing Vulnerabilities of LLM Router
Evaluated models: Not reported

Source: arXiv

Published 3/1/2025
Analyzed 3/19/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel jailbreaking attack leveraging adversarial metaphors. The attack, termed AVATAR, induces the LLM to reason about benign metaphors related to harmful tasks, ultimately leading to the generation of harmful content either directly or through calibration of metaphorical and professional harmful content. The attack exploits the LLM's cognitive mapping process, bypassing standard safety mechanisms.

from Benign import Toxic: Jailbreaking the Language Model via Adversarial Metaphors
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GLM 3 6B, GPT-4o +8 more

Source: arXiv

Published 3/1/2025
Analyzed 4/21/2025

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to a novel attack vector leveraging narrative-driven visual storytelling and role immersion to circumvent built-in safety mechanisms. The attack, termed MIRAGE, decomposes harmful queries into environment, character, and activity triplets, generating a sequence of images and text prompts that guide the MLLM through a deceptive narrative, ultimately eliciting harmful responses. The attack successfully exploits the MLLM's cross-modal…

MIRAGE: Multimodal Immersive Reasoning and Guided Exploration for Red-Team Jailbreak Attacks
Evaluated models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4V, Grok 2 Vision +3 more

Source: arXiv

Published 3/1/2025
Analyzed 3/19/2025

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

Source: arXiv

Published 3/1/2025
Analyzed 12/9/2025

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

Source: arXiv

Published 2/1/2025
Analyzed 12/9/2025

Vision-Language Models (VLMs), specifically the LLaVA-1.5 and LLaVA-1.6 series, are vulnerable to optimization-based white-box jailbreak attacks despite standard safety alignment measures like Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO). Attackers can craft adversarial perturbations in the image space (imperceptible noise) or latent space using Projected Gradient Descent (PGD) to manipulate the model's internal representations. These perturbations maximize the…

Adversary-Aware DPO: Enhancing Safety Alignment in Vision Language Models via Adversarial Training
Evaluated models: LLaVA 1.5 7B, LLaVA 1.6 7B

Source: arXiv

Published 2/1/2025
Analyzed 3/4/2025

A vulnerability in large language models (LLMs) allows attackers to bypass safety-alignment mechanisms by manipulating the model's internal attention weights. The attack, termed "Attention Eclipse," modifies the attention scores between specific tokens within a prompt, either amplifying or suppressing attention to selectively strengthen or weaken the influence of certain parts of the prompt on the model's output. This allows injection of malicious content while appearing benign to the model's…

Attention Eclipse: Manipulating Attention to Bypass LLM Safety-Alignment
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4o Mini, Llama 2 13B Chat +3 more

Source: arXiv

Published 2/1/2025
Analyzed 2/16/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety alignment strategies are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks. These attacks manipulate the LLM's internal representation by activating "jailbreak concepts" in addition to "toxic concepts," causing the model to bypass safety guardrails and generate unsafe outputs despite recognizing the harmful nature of the input. The vulnerability stems from the insufficient mitigation of the influence of the activated jailbreak concepts on model output.

JBShield: Defending Large Language Models from Jailbreak Attacks through Activated Concept Analysis and Manipulation
Evaluated models: Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2 +2 more

Source: arXiv

Published 2/1/2025
Analyzed 3/4/2025

A context-coherent jailbreak attack (CCJA) allows bypassing safety mechanisms in aligned large language models (LLMs) by optimizing perturbations in the continuous word embedding space of a masked language model (MLM). The attack leverages the MLM's ability to reconstruct text from hidden states to generate semantically coherent yet malicious prompts that induce the target LLM to produce unsafe outputs, even with strong safety alignment. The attack's effectiveness is enhanced by using a seed…

CCJA: Context-Coherent Jailbreak Attack for Aligned Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Guanaco 13B, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct +4 more

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.