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

114 entries

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

Agent Persistent Memory Poisoning

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Unauthenticated, query-only memory poisoning (Memory Injection Attack - MINJA) in LLM agents equipped with persistent, shared memory allows attackers to manipulate the agent's long-term knowledge base. Adversaries embed malicious "indication prompts" and utilize progressive shortening within seemingly benign queries to induce the agent into autonomously generating and storing corrupted relational mappings. Because the memory is shared and retrieved via similarity (e.g., Levenshtein distance)…

Memory Poisoning Attack and Defense on Memory Based LLM-Agents
Evaluated models: GPT-4o Mini, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

Alignment Override Unlearnable Data

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A data poisoning vulnerability in safety-aligned Large Language Models (LLMs) allows attackers to disrupt model fine-tuning via "Disclaimer Injection." By appending or prepending short, legal-style safety or liability disclaimers to ordinary training data, an attacker can reliably trigger the model's internal alignment mechanisms. This forces the model to route the training inputs through specialized safety and refusal pathways rather than standard task-learning layers. Consequently, the model…

Rendering Data Unlearnable by Exploiting LLM Alignment Mechanisms
Evaluated models: GPT-5.1, Llama 3 8B

AI Agent Structural Blindspot

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability in AI agent threat detection systems relying on standard conversational tokenization allows attackers to bypass security monitors and execute structural attacks, such as tool hijacking and data exfiltration. Because traditional NLP-based detectors focus on linguistic patterns (surface language) rather than execution flow, an attacker can orchestrate malicious multi-step tool sequences using entirely benign natural language. This structural blindness causes cross-attack…

Structural Representations for Cross-Attack Generalization in AI Agent Threat Detection
Evaluated models: Not reported

Automated Prompt Recommender Leak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

LLaMA-series models (specifically evaluated on LLaMA-1B and LLaMA-3B) exhibit memorization of structured recommender system training data, specifically the MovieLens-1M dataset. While manual prompting yields inconsistent results, the application of Automatic Prompt Engineering (APE)—which treats prompt design as an optimization problem using iterative refinement—allows for the successful extraction of item-level training data (e.g., movie titles and genres) with exact-match accuracy surpassing…

Exploring Approaches for Detecting Memorization of Recommender System Data in Large Language Models
Evaluated models: Not reported

Cross-Environment Agent Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Model (LLM) agents operating in tool-augmented environments are susceptible to "Contextual Fragility" and multi-turn "long-chain" exploitation. Existing safety mechanisms predominantly function on a stateless, atomic paradigm, evaluating individual input-output pairs in isolation. This allows an adversary to orchestrate complex attack trajectories where malicious intent is distributed across multiple, individually benign steps (a "Domino Effect"). Consequently, an attacker can…

DREAM: Dynamic Red-teaming for Evaluating Agentic Multi-Environment Security
Evaluated models: o4-mini, Gemini 2.5 Flash, GPT-5+8 more
  • o4-mini
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash
  • GPT-5
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro
  • Grok 4
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5
  • Qwen 3 235B-A22B
  • Kimi K2 Preview
  • Llama 3.1 70B
  • Qwen 2.5 72B
  • DeepSeek V3.1

GPT Tool Misuse

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in OpenAI's Custom GPTs platform where the lack of effective isolation between the system context ("Expert Prompt"), external knowledge retrieval, and user input allows for unauthorized information disclosure and tool misuse. By employing specific prompt injection techniques—including Hex injection, Many-shot prefix attacks, and Knowledge Poisoning (uploading malicious files)—an attacker can bypass safety guardrails. This results in the extraction of proprietary system…

An Empirical Study on the Security Vulnerabilities of GPTs
Evaluated models: DALL-E

Adversarial Poetry Jailbreak

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Models (LLMs) from multiple vendors are vulnerable to a "poetic jailbreak" attack, a form of stylistic obfuscation where safety guardrails are bypassed by formatting harmful requests as poetry. By encoding prohibited instructions (e.g., malware creation, CBRN protocols) into verse—utilizing metaphors, rhyme schemes, and rhythmic structure—an attacker can evade intent recognition heuristics. The model perceives the input primarily as a creative writing constraint rather than a…

Adversarial Poetry as a Universal Single-Turn Jailbreak Mechanism in Large Language Models
Evaluated models: DeepSeek Chat V3.1, DeepSeek V3.2 Exp, Qwen 3 32B+22 more
  • DeepSeek Chat V3.1
  • DeepSeek V3.2 Exp
  • Qwen 3 32B
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash
  • Kimi K2
  • Gemini 2.5 Pro
  • Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
  • DeepSeek R1
  • Magistral Medium 2506
  • Qwen 3 Max
  • Mistral Large 2411
  • Mistral Small 3.2 24B Instruct
  • Llama 4 Maverick
  • Llama 4 Scout
  • Kimi K2 Thinking
  • Grok 4 Fast
  • GPT-oss 20B
  • Grok 4
  • GPT-oss 120B
  • Claude Sonnet 4.5
  • GPT-5
  • Claude Opus 4.1
  • GPT-5 Mini
  • GPT-5 Nano
  • Claude Haiku 4.5

Latent Space Discontinuity Exploitation

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

A vulnerability exists in certain Large Language Models and diffusion models due to discontinuities in their latent space, which arise from data sparsity during training. An attacker can craft inputs containing lexically rare or semantically ambiguous constructs to guide the model's inference process toward these unstable, poorly-conditioned regions. This technique, termed "Alignment Degradation Induction," can degrade or bypass safety alignment mechanisms. Through iterative, multi-turn…

Exploiting Latent Space Discontinuities for Building Universal LLM Jailbreaks and Data Extraction Attacks
Evaluated models: Not reported

Mobile Agent Channel Subversion

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Mobile LLM-based agents (including Mobile-Agent-E, AppAgent, AutoDroid, and others) are vulnerable to indirect prompt injection attacks delivered via untrusted third-party mobile channels, such as in-app advertisements, system notifications, and embedded webviews. These agents utilize Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) to perceive the device state via screenshots or accessibility trees. The vulnerability exists because the agents concatenate the user's prompt ($p$) with the environmental…

Measuring the Security of Mobile LLM Agents under Adversarial Prompts from Untrusted Third-Party Channels
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4 Turbo, GPT-4o+1 more
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4 Turbo
  • GPT-4o
  • GPT-4.1 Mini

LLM Data Instruction Override

Published Analyzed Source: arXiv

Large Language Model (LLM) integrated agents and applications are vulnerable to Prompt Injection attacks where untrusted data (e.g., retrieved documents, tool outputs, website content) overrides system instructions. Because LLMs typically process instructions and data within a single context window without strict separation, an attacker can embed imperative commands within the data channel. This vulnerability extends beyond simple overriding instructions; it includes sophisticated techniques…

Defending against prompt injection with datafilter
Evaluated models: GPT-4o, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct

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.