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

Language Model Security Database

985 research findings · 1123 evaluated models

Filtered research findings

736 entries

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

Published 12/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Llama 2 and Vicuna exhibit a vulnerability where specific layers (e.g., layer 3 in Llama2-13B, layer 1 in Llama2-7B and Vicuna-13B) overfit to harmful prompts, resulting in a disproportionate influence on the model's output for such prompts. This overfitting creates a narrow "safety" mechanism easily bypassed by adversarial prompts designed to avoid triggering these specific layers. Additionally, a single neuron (e.g., neuron 2100 in Llama2 and Vicuna)…

Causality analysis for evaluating the security of large language models
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-NeoX, Llama 2-13B-chat-hf +2 more

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A vulnerability in Text-to-Image (T2I) models' safety filters allows bypassing through the injection of adversarial prompts crafted by an LLM-driven multi-agent system. The attack, named Divide-and-Conquer Attack (DACA), circumvents the filters by rephrasing harmful prompts into multiple benign descriptions of individual visual components, thus avoiding detection while maintaining the original visual intent.

Divide-and-Conquer Attack: Harnessing the Power of LLM to Bypass the Censorship of Text-to-Image Generation Model
Evaluated models: Chatglm-turbo, DALL-E 3, GPT-3.5 Turbo +5 more

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) with accessible output logits are vulnerable to "coercive interrogation," a novel attack that extracts harmful knowledge hidden in low-ranked tokens. The attack doesn't require crafted prompts; instead, it iteratively forces the LLM to select and output low-probability tokens at key positions in the response sequence, revealing toxic content the model would otherwise suppress.

Make them spill the beans! coercive knowledge extraction from (production) llms
Evaluated models: Code Llama 13B Instruct, Codellama-13B-python, GPT-3.5 +7 more

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

A vulnerability in ChatGPT allows malicious actors to bypass safety mechanisms and elicit undesired responses (jailbreak) by crafting prompts in multiple languages or specifying a response language different from the input language. This is amplified by prompt injection techniques.

Comprehensive evaluation of chatgpt reliability through multilingual inquiries
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, PaLM 2

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit an inherent response tendency, predisposing them towards affirmation or rejection of instructions. The RADIAL attack exploits this tendency by strategically inserting real-world instructions, identified as inherently inducing affirmation responses, around malicious prompts. This bypasses LLM safety mechanisms, resulting in the generation of harmful content.

Analyzing the inherent response tendency of llms: Real-world instructions-driven jailbreak
Evaluated models: Baichuan 2 13B Chat, Baichuan 2 7B Chat, ChatGLM2 6B +3 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A vulnerability exists in large language models (LLMs) utilizing in-context learning (ICL). Malicious actors can inject imperceptible adversarial suffixes into in-context demonstrations, causing the LLM to generate targeted, unintended outputs, even when the user query is benign. The attack manipulates the LLM's attention mechanism, diverting it towards the adversarial tokens.

Hijacking large language models via adversarial in-context learning
Evaluated models: Llama 13B, Llama 3.1 8B, Llama 3.1 8B Instruct +3 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Model (LLM)-based agents, due to their multi-agent architecture and role-based interactions, are vulnerable to adversarial attacks that exploit the system's design and agent roles. Maliciously crafted prompts, particularly those targeting system-level roles, can cause agents to generate harmful content, bypassing safety mechanisms more effectively than attacks against individual LLMs. The vulnerability stems from a "domino effect" where one compromised agent can trigger harmful…

Evil geniuses: Delving into the safety of llm-based agents
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/29/2024

Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks exploiting cognitive overload induced by multilingual prompts, veiled expressions, and effect-to-cause reasoning. These attacks bypass safety mechanisms by overwhelming the model's processing capabilities, leading to the generation of unsafe or harmful responses. The attacks are effective against various LLMs, including both open-source and proprietary models, and are not easily mitigated by existing defense mechanisms.

Cognitive overload: Jailbreaking large language models with overloaded logical thinking
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo-0301, Guanaco 7B, Guanaco 13B +8 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A prompt injection vulnerability in OpenAI's custom GPT models allows attackers to extract the system prompt and potentially leak user-uploaded files. Attackers craft malicious prompts that manipulate the LLM into revealing sensitive information, even when defensive prompts are in place. The vulnerability is exacerbated when the model includes a code interpreter.

Assessing prompt injection risks in 200+ custom gpts
Evaluated models: Not reported

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2023
Analyzed 12/28/2024

A vulnerability in the fine-tuning API of GPT-4 allows attackers to circumvent built-in RLHF safety mechanisms by fine-tuning the model with a relatively small number of carefully crafted prompt-response pairs. This enables the generation of harmful content, including instructions for illegal activities and the creation of dangerous materials, despite the base model's refusal to generate such content.

Removing rlhf protections in gpt-4 via fine-tuning
Evaluated models: GPT-3.5 Turbo, GPT-4, Llama 2 70B

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.