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

Language Model Security Database

985 research findings · 1119 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

609 entries

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

LLM Resource Exhaustion Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel jailbreak attack that exploits resource limitations. By overloading the model with a computationally intensive preliminary task (e.g., a complex character map lookup and decoding), the attacker prevents the activation of the LLM's safety mechanisms, enabling the generation of unsafe outputs from subsequent prompts. The attack's strength is scalable and adjustable by modifying the complexity of the preliminary task.

Harnessing Task Overload for Scalable Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Llama 3 8B, Mistral 7B, Qwen 2.5 14B+5 more
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 14B
  • Qwen 2.5 32B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B
  • Qwen 2.5 3B
  • Qwen 2.5 72B
  • Vicuna7B-v0.3

Implicit Reference Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to an attack vector termed "Attack via Implicit Reference" (AIR). AIR bypasses safety mechanisms by decomposing a malicious objective into multiple benign, seemingly unrelated objectives linked through implicit contextual references. The LLM generates harmful content by combining the outputs of these seemingly harmless objectives, without explicitly triggering safety filters designed to detect direct requests for malicious content.

You Know What I'm Saying: Jailbreak Attack via Implicit Reference
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini+7 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • GPT-4o-0513
  • Llama 3 70B
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Qwen 2 7B
  • Qwen 2 0.5B
  • Qwen 2 1.5B
  • Qwen 2 72B

Iterative Image Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A Chain-of-Jailbreak (CoJ) attack allows bypassing safety mechanisms in image generation models by iteratively editing images based on a sequence of sub-queries. The attack decomposes a malicious query into multiple, seemingly benign sub-queries, each causing the model to generate and modify an image, ultimately producing harmful content. Successful attacks leverage various editing operations (insert, delete, change) on different elements (words, characters, images).

Chain-of-Jailbreak Attack for Image Generation Models via Editing Step by Step
Evaluated models: Gemini 1.5 Pro, GPT-4o, GPT-4V

Autonomous Jailbreak Agent

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreak attacks using autonomously discovered strategies. AutoDAN-Turbo, a black-box attack method, demonstrates the ability to discover novel and highly effective jailbreak strategies without human intervention, achieving a high success rate (e.g., 88.5% on GPT-4-1106-turbo) in eliciting harmful or unsafe responses from LLMs. The attack leverages a lifelong learning agent to iteratively refine attack strategies based on model responses…

Autodan-turbo: A lifelong agent for strategy self-exploration to jailbreak llms
Evaluated models: Gemini Pro, Gemma 7B IT, GPT-4-1106-turbo+5 more
  • Gemini Pro
  • Gemma 7B IT
  • GPT-4-1106-turbo
  • Llama 2 13B Chat
  • Llama 2 70B Chat
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Llama 3 70B
  • Llama 3 8B

Safeguard Denial-of-Service Attack

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A denial-of-service (DoS) vulnerability exists in certain Large Language Model (LLM) safeguard implementations due to susceptibility to adversarial prompts. Attackers can inject short, seemingly innocuous adversarial prompts into user prompt templates, causing the safeguard to incorrectly classify legitimate user requests as unsafe and reject them. This allows for a DoS attack against specific users without requiring modification of the LLM itself.

Safeguard is a Double-edged Sword: Denial-of-service Attack on Large Language Models
Evaluated models: GPT-4o Mini, Llama Guard 2 8B, Llama Guard 3 8B+2 more
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama Guard 2 8B
  • Llama Guard 3 8B
  • Llama Guard 7B
  • Vicuna 7B v1.5

Bijection-Based LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel "bijection learning" attack that leverages in-context learning to teach the model a custom string-to-string encoding, bypassing built-in safety mechanisms. The attack encodes harmful queries, sends them to the model, and decodes the response, effectively circumventing safety filters. The complexity of the encoding can be controlled, adapting the attack to various LLMs; more capable models are more susceptible to complex encodings.

Endless Jailbreaks with Bijection Learning
Evaluated models: Claude 3 Haiku, Claude 3 Opus, Claude 3.5 Sonnet+5 more
  • Claude 3 Haiku
  • Claude 3 Opus
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Gemini 1.5 Pro
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3.1 8B
  • Llama Guard 3

Left-Side Noise Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit a left-to-right processing bias, making them vulnerable to "FlipAttack." This attack disguises a harmful prompt by flipping (reversing) the order of characters or words, thereby reducing the LLM’s comprehension of the harmful content. A "flipping guidance" module then instructs the LLM to reverse the flipped text, revealing and executing the original harmful prompt.

FlipAttack: Jailbreak LLMs via Flipping
Evaluated models: Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4+5 more
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3.1 405B
  • Mixtral 8x22B

Fine-Tuning Overrides Safety

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Fine-tuning an open-source Large Language Model (LLM) such as Llama 3.1 8B with a dataset containing harmful content can override existing safety protections. This allows an attacker to increase the model's rate of generating unsafe responses, significantly impacting its trustworthiness and safety. The vulnerability affects the model's ability to consistently adhere to safety guidelines implemented during its initial training.

Overriding Safety protections of Open-source Models
Evaluated models: Llama 3.1 8B

Concealed Multi-Turn Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a novel multi-turn jailbreaking attack, termed "RED QUEEN ATTACK." This attack uses multi-turn conversations to conceal malicious intent by framing the user as a protector seeking to prevent harmful actions by others. The LLM, instead of detecting the concealed malicious intent, provides information that facilitates the harmful action under the guise of assisting in prevention efforts.

RED QUEEN: Safeguarding Large Language Models against Concealed Multi-Turn Jailbreaking
Evaluated models: GPT-4o

Automated LLM Fuzz Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A novel black-box attack framework leverages fuzz testing to automatically generate concise and semantically coherent prompts that bypass safety mechanisms in large language models (LLMs), eliciting harmful or offensive responses. The attack starts with an empty seed pool, utilizes LLM-assisted mutation strategies (Role-play, Contextualization, Expand), and employs a two-level judge module for efficient identification of successful jailbreaks. The attack's effectiveness is demonstrated across…

Effective and Evasive Fuzz Testing-Driven Jailbreaking Attacks against LLMs
Evaluated models: Baichuan 2 7B Chat, Gemini Pro, GPT-3.5 Turbo+4 more
  • Baichuan 2 7B Chat
  • Gemini Pro
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4
  • Guanaco 7B
  • Llama 2 7B Chat
  • Vicuna 7B v1.3

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.

Discovery and publication are separate: new papers enter a candidate queue, then require human review and explicit approval before publication. Updates follow that review process, not a guaranteed daily publishing schedule. “Last analyzed” is the newest analysis date among published entries; it does not mean that all recent research has been covered.