Language Model Security Database

Large Language Models (LLMs) utilizing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) and other safety alignment techniques are vulnerable to "CognitiveAttack," a jailbreak vector that exploits synergistic cognitive biases. The vulnerability exists because models internalize human-like reasoning fallacies during pre-training and alignment. Adversaries can bypass safety guardrails by rewriting harmful instructions to trigger specific psychological heuristics—specifically through the…

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…

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to visual contextual attacks, where carefully crafted images and accompanying text prompts can bypass safety mechanisms and elicit harmful responses. The vulnerability stems from the MLLM's ability to integrate visual and textual context to generate outputs, allowing attackers to create realistic scenarios that subvert safety filters. Specifically, the attack leverages image-driven context injection to construct deceptive multi-turn…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to obfuscation-based jailbreak attacks using the MetaCipher framework. MetaCipher employs a reinforcement learning algorithm to iteratively select from a pool of 21 ciphers to encrypt malicious keywords within prompts, evading standard safety mechanisms that rely on keyword detection. The framework adaptively learns optimal cipher choices to maximize the success rate of the jailbreak, even against LLMs with reasoning capabilities. Successful attacks…

Large Language Model (LLM) agents capable of invoking external APIs are vulnerable to intent integrity violations. When an agent receives natural language instructions that are ambiguous, underspecified, or contain values not supported by the underlying API schema, the agent frequently fails to preserve user intent. Instead of rejecting the request or asking for clarification, the model may hallucinate parameter values, map unsupported requests to unsafe defaults, or execute actions on…

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…

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel adversarial attack, Alphabet Index Mapping (AIM), which achieves high success rates in bypassing safety filters ("jailbreaking"). AIM encodes prompts by converting characters to their alphabet indices, maximizing semantic dissimilarity while maintaining straightforward decoding instructions. This allows malicious prompts to evade detection based on semantic similarity, even when the LLM correctly decodes the intent.

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…

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.

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…