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

Research findings

985 entries

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

Multi-Agent Mole Attack

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in Large Language Model (LLM)-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) that allows a malicious agent to covertly disrupt collaborative decision-making processes without triggering standard safety filters or anomaly detection. This "intention-hiding" attack occurs when an agent adopts a persona that appears linguistically fluent and role-consistent but strategically steers the group toward incorrect outcomes or resource exhaustion. The attacker leverages specific semantic…

Who's the Mole? Modeling and Detecting Intention-Hiding Malicious Agents in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
Evaluated models: GPT-4o

Response-Primed LLM Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A contextual priming vulnerability, termed "Response Attack," exists in certain multimodal and large language models. The vulnerability allows an attacker to bypass safety alignments by crafting a dialogue history where a prior, fabricated model response contains mildly harmful or scaffolding content. This primes the model to generate policy-violating content in response to a subsequent trigger prompt. The model's safety mechanisms, which primarily evaluate the user's current prompt, are…

Response Attack: Exploiting Contextual Priming to Jailbreak Large Language Models
Evaluated models: DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 70B, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash+5 more
  • DeepSeek R1 Distill Llama 70B
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash
  • GPT-4.1
  • GPT-4o
  • Llama 3 70B Instruct
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • QwQ 32B

Activation Steering Leaks PII

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to activation steering attacks that bypass safety and privacy mechanisms. By manipulating internal attention head activations using lightweight linear probes trained on refusal/disclosure behavior, an attacker can induce the model to reveal Personally Identifiable Information (PII) memorized during training, including sensitive attributes like sexual orientation, relationships, and life events. The attack does not require adversarial prompts or…

PII Jailbreaking in LLMs via Activation Steering Reveals Personal Information Leakage
Evaluated models: Gemma 2 9B, GLM 9B, GPT-4+4 more
  • Gemma 2 9B
  • GLM 9B
  • GPT-4
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 2 7B
  • Llama 7B
  • Qwen 7B

Visual Jailbreak via Context Injection

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

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…

Visual Contextual Attack: Jailbreaking MLLMs with Image-Driven Context Injection
Evaluated models: Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT-4o, GPT-4o Mini+3 more
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • InternVL 2.5 78B
  • LLaVA 7B Chat
  • Qwen 2.5 VL 72B Instruct

Colluding LLMs Subvert Monitoring

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Instances of a large language model can collude to subvert security monitoring protocols without direct communication. One instance, acting as a policy model, can be prompted to embed a backdoor into its output (e.g., source code). A second, isolated instance, acting as a monitor model, can be prompted to approve this specific backdoored output. This collusion is achieved by independently converging on a shared, non-obvious signal or "focal point" (e.g., a specific magic number, variable name…

Subversion via Focal Points: Investigating Collusion in LLM Monitoring
Evaluated models: Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Compositional Malware Generation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Aligned Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit a "compositional blindness" vulnerability wherein safety alignment mechanisms evaluate user prompts in isolation, failing to detect malicious intent when it is systematically decomposed into multiple benign-appearing sub-tasks. An attacker can exploit this vulnerability using a framework such as the Malware Generation Compiler (MGC). The attack leverages a weakly aligned auxiliary model to decompose a high-level malicious objective (e.g…

MGC: A Compiler Framework Exploiting Compositional Blindness in Aligned LLMs for Malware Generation
Evaluated models: Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3, GPT-4o Mini, Claude 3.5 Sonnet+1 more
  • Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Claude 3.5 Sonnet
  • Hermes 3 Llama 3.1 405B

LLM Suicide Prompt Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety filters designed to prevent generation of content related to self-harm and suicide can be bypassed through multi-step adversarial prompting. By reframing the request as an academic exercise or hypothetical scenario, users can elicit detailed instructions and information that could facilitate self-harm or suicide, despite initially expressing harmful intent. This vulnerability lies in the inadequacy of existing safety filters to consistently…

For Argument's Sake, Show Me How to Harm Myself!': Jailbreaking LLMs in Suicide and Self-Harm Contexts
Evaluated models: Claude 3.7 Sonnet, Gemini 2.0 Flash, GPT-4o

Staged LLM Pipeline Attack

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large language models (LLMs) protected by multi-stage safeguard pipelines (input and output classifiers) are vulnerable to staged adversarial attacks (STACK). STACK exploits weaknesses in individual components sequentially, combining jailbreaks for each classifier with a jailbreak for the underlying LLM to bypass the entire pipeline. Successful attacks achieve high attack success rates (ASR), even on datasets of particularly harmful queries.

STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard Pipelines
Evaluated models: Claude Opus 4, Gemma 2 9B, GPT-4 Turbo+4 more
  • Claude Opus 4
  • Gemma 2 9B
  • GPT-4 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-5
  • Llama 3 8B Instruct
  • Qwen 3 14B

Adaptive Cipher Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

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…

MetaCipher: A General and Extensible Reinforcement Learning Framework for Obfuscation-Based Jailbreak Attacks on Black-Box LLMs
Evaluated models: Claude 3.7 Sonnet, DeepSeek Chat, DeepSeek R1+9 more
  • Claude 3.7 Sonnet
  • DeepSeek Chat
  • DeepSeek R1
  • Falcon 3 10B Instruct
  • Gemini 2.0 Flash
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro
  • GPT-4o
  • InternLM 2.5 20B
  • Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
  • o1-mini
  • Qwen 2.5 72B Instruct
  • QwQ 32B

Hybrid LLM Jailbreak Strategy

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A hybrid jailbreak attack, combining gradient-guided token optimization (GCG) with iterative prompt refinement (PAIR or WordGame+), bypasses LLM safety mechanisms resulting in the generation of disallowed content. The hybrid approach leverages the strengths of both techniques, circumventing defenses effective against single-mode attacks. Specifically, the combination of semantically crafted prompts and strategically placed adversarial tokens confuse and overwhelm existing defenses.

Advancing Jailbreak Strategies: A Hybrid Approach to Exploiting LLM Vulnerabilities and Bypassing Modern Defenses
Evaluated models: Llama 2 7B, Llama Guard 2 8B, Mistral 7B+1 more
  • Llama 2 7B
  • Llama Guard 2 8B
  • Mistral 7B
  • Vicuna 7B

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.