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

608 entries

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

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
Affects: GPT-4o, InternVL 2 40B, Qwen VL 2 72B +1 more

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
Affects: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +6 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 1/26/2025

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
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini +1 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to multi-round jailbreak attacks which leverage a heuristic search process to progressively elicit harmful content. The attack decomposes a harmful query into multiple, seemingly innocuous sub-queries, iteratively refining the prompts based on the LLM's responses and employing psychological strategies to bypass safety mechanisms. This allows for the circumvention of single-round detection methods and elicitation of responses containing prohibited…

MRJ-Agent: An Effective Jailbreak Agent for Multi-Round Dialogue
Affects: DALL-E 3, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 +4 more

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
Affects: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Grok 2 +1 more

Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks exploiting nonlinear features within prompt encodings. These features, not detectable by linear methods, allow adversaries to reliably elicit harmful outputs despite safety training. Different attack methods leverage distinct nonlinear features, limiting the transferability of detection and mitigation techniques.

What Features in Prompts Jailbreak LLMs? Investigating the Mechanisms Behind Attacks
Affects: Gemma 7B IT, Llama 3 8B Instruct

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

LLMStinger uses a reinforcement-learning loop to fine-tune an attacker model that generates adversarial suffixes for jailbreak prompts. Because the approach does not require white-box access to the target, it can adapt existing attacks for both open- and closed-source assistants and bypass otherwise effective refusal behavior.

LLMStinger: Jailbreaking LLMs using RL fine-tuned LLMs
Affects: Claude 2, Gemma 2B IT, GPT-3.5 Turbo +3 more

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/28/2024

A novel SQL Injection Jailbreak (SIJ) vulnerability allows attackers to bypass safety mechanisms in Large Language Models (LLMs) by manipulating the structure of input prompts. The attack leverages the model's processing of system prompts, user prefixes, user prompts, and assistant prefixes to effectively "comment out" the expected response prefix and inject harmful instructions, causing the LLM to generate unsafe content. This vulnerability exploits the external properties of the LLM…

SQL Injection Jailbreak: a structural disaster of large language models
Affects: DeepSeek LLM 7B Chat, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct +2 more

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

Source: arXiv

Updated 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety alignment mechanisms are vulnerable to a bypass attack using simple, stochastic random augmentations of input prompts. The attack leverages the inherent brittleness of safety alignment to minor, randomly introduced modifications in the input, causing the LLM to generate unsafe outputs despite its safety training. Character-level augmentations prove significantly more effective than string insertions.

Stochastic Monkeys at Play: Random Augmentations Cheaply Break LLM Safety Alignment
Affects: GPT-4o, Llama 2 13B Chat, Llama 2 7B Chat +12 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.