Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research search
Updated 7/21/2026, database is current

Language Model Security Database

959 research findings · 1077 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

599 entries

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

Updated 3/8/2026

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are vulnerable to coupled cross-modal jailbreak attacks that combine continuous visual perturbations with discrete textual manipulations. Because standard alignment and single-modality defenses (such as text-only safety tuning or isolated vision-encoder adversarial training) fail to secure the cross-modal interaction, attackers can simultaneously apply gradient-based noise (e.g., PGD) to input images and adversarial suffixes (e.g., GCG) to text prompts…

E2AT: Multimodal Jailbreak Defense via Dynamic Joint Optimization for Multimodal Large Language Models
Affects: LLaVA 1.5 7B, Bunny 1.0 4B, Mplug-owl2

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) used for code generation are vulnerable to a jailbreaking attack that leverages implicit malicious prompts. The attack exploits the fact that existing safety mechanisms primarily rely on explicit malicious intent within the prompt instructions. By embedding malicious intent implicitly within a benign-appearing commit message accompanying a code request (e.g., in a simulated software evolution scenario), the attacker can bypass the LLM's safety filters and induce…

Smoke and Mirrors: Jailbreaking LLM-based Code Generation via Implicit Malicious Prompts
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Code Llama 13B Instruct, DeepSeek Coder 7B +3 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 3/19/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks by crafted prompts that bypass safety mechanisms, causing the model to generate harmful or unethical content. This vulnerability stems from the inherent tension between the LLM's instruction-following and safety constraints. The JBFuzz technique demonstrates the ability to efficiently and effectively discover such prompts through a fuzzing-based approach leveraging novel seed prompt templates and a synonym-based mutation strategy.

JBFuzz: Jailbreaking LLMs Efficiently and Effectively Using Fuzzing
Affects: DeepSeek Chat, DeepSeek R1, Gemini 1.5 Flash +6 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to an adversarial encoding attack where English instructions are obfuscated using valid but visually nonsensical UTF-8 byte sequences. By manipulating multi-byte UTF-8 encoding schemes—specifically by fixing the last 8 bits of a code point to match a target ASCII character and rotating the remaining bits—attackers can generate sequences (e.g., Byzantine musical symbols) that appear incomprehensible to humans and standard text filters but are…

À la recherche du sens perdu: your favourite LLM might have more to say than you can understand
Affects: Claude 3.5 Haiku, Claude 3.5 Sonnet 20241022, Claude 3.5 Sonnet 20240620 +11 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 4/21/2025

A vulnerability in safeguarded text-to-image models allows bypassing of safety filters and alignment methods through the use of adversarial prompts generated by a fine-tuned large language model (LLM). The attack, termed PromptTune, effectively rewrites unsafe prompts into semantically similar adversarial prompts that evade safety mechanisms, resulting in the generation of harmful images. The attack does not require repeated queries to the target text-to-image model.

Jailbreaking Safeguarded Text-to-Image Models via Large Language Models
Affects: BLIP-2, CLIP, DALL-E 3 +4 more

Source: arXiv

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

Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in text-to-image (T2I) models allows bypassing safety filters through the use of metaphor-based adversarial prompts. These prompts, crafted using LLMs, indirectly convey sensitive content, exploiting the model's ability to infer meaning from figurative language while circumventing explicit keyword filters and model editing strategies.

Metaphor-based Jailbreaking Attacks on Text-to-Image Models
Affects: DALL-E 3, Flux, Llama 3 8B Instruct +3 more

Source: arXiv

Improper input validation in the memory module of Large Language Model (LLM)-powered agentic Recommender Systems (RS) allows remote attackers to perform indirect prompt injection via adversarial item descriptions. By utilizing the "DrunkAgent" framework, an attacker can embed semantic triggers and control characters (such as segmentation tokens and escape characters) into product descriptions. These injections manipulate the agent's memory update mechanism during agent-environment…

DrunkAgent: Stealthy Memory Corruption in LLM-Powered Recommender Agents
Affects: GPT-4, o1, Llama 3 8B

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) with structured output APIs (e.g., using JSON Schema) are vulnerable to Constrained Decoding Attacks (CDAs). CDAs exploit the control plane of the LLM's decoding process by embedding malicious intent within the schema-level grammar rules, bypassing safety mechanisms that primarily focus on input prompts. The attack manipulates the allowed output space, forcing the LLM to generate harmful content despite a benign input prompt. One instance of a CDA is the Chain Enum…

Output Constraints as Attack Surface: Exploiting Structured Generation to Bypass LLM Safety Mechanisms
Affects: Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemma 2 9B, GPT-4o +5 more

Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) incorporating safety filters are vulnerable to a "Prompt, Divide, and Conquer" attack. This attack segments a malicious prompt into smaller, seemingly benign parts, processes these segments in parallel across multiple LLMs, and then reassembles the results to generate malicious code, bypassing the safety filters. The attack's success relies on the iterative refinement of initially abstract function descriptions into concrete implementations. Individual LLM safety…

Prompt, Divide, and Conquer: Bypassing Large Language Model Safety Filters via Segmented and Distributed Prompt Processing
Affects: Claude 3.5 Haiku, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini 1.5 Pro +3 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.