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

228 entries

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

Published 1/1/2026
Analyzed 3/8/2026

A fine-tuning vulnerability in the safety alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) allows adversaries to systematically bypass refusal mechanisms by training the model on a small dataset (as few as 1,000 samples) of strictly benign text. By prepending standard refusal prefixes (e.g., "I'm sorry", "I cannot fulfill this request") to the target outputs of benign instruction-response pairs, attackers disrupt the model's refusal completion pathway. When subsequently prompted with unsafe queries…

LLMs Can Unlearn Refusal with Only 1,000 Benign Samples
Evaluated models: Llama 2 13B, Llama 3.1 8B, Llama 3.2 1B +13 more

Source: arXiv

Published 1/1/2026
Analyzed 2/22/2026

Neural Ranking Models (NRMs) utilizing Transformer architectures (specifically BERT and T5-based re-rankers) are vulnerable to minimal adversarial perturbations that artificially promote a target document's rank. The vulnerability allows an attacker to manipulate ranking outcomes by inserting or substituting a single "query center" token—a word identified as the semantic centroid of the user's query—into the target document. The attack exploits the model's sensitivity to specific semantic…

One Word is Enough: Minimal Adversarial Perturbations for Neural Text Ranking
Evaluated models: Not reported

Source: arXiv

Published 1/1/2026
Analyzed 2/21/2026

Large Language Models (LLMs), specifically open-weight instruction-tuned models (including Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen3-8B, and Gemma-7B) and certain closed-weight APIs allowing partial response pre-filling, are vulnerable to "Sockpuppetting" or Output Prefix Injection. This vulnerability exploits the model's autoregressive nature and self-consistency bias. By injecting a target acceptance sequence (e.g., "Sure, here is...") directly into the start of the assistant message block within the chat…

Sockpuppetting: Jailbreaking LLMs by Combining Prefilling with Optimization
Evaluated models: Llama 3.1 8B, Qwen 3 8B, Gemma 7B

Source: arXiv

Published 1/1/2026
Analyzed 2/22/2026

A vulnerability exists in trimodal audio-video-language models where an attacker can systematically degrade multimodal reasoning through untargeted, audio-only adversarial perturbations. By optimizing a shared perturbation $\delta$ applied to the audio channel, an attacker can manipulate internal representations—specifically targeting audio encoder embeddings and cross-modal attention mechanisms—without modifying visual or textual inputs. The attack exploits the model's reliance on the audio…

SoundBreak: A Systematic Study of Audio-Only Adversarial Attacks on Trimodal Models
Evaluated models: VideoLLAMA2, Qwen 2 7B Instruct, Whisper Large-v2 +1 more

Source: arXiv

Published 1/1/2026
Analyzed 2/22/2026

A vulnerability exists in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) utilizing visual token compression mechanisms (e.g., VisionZip, VisPruner) to reduce inference latency. The vulnerability stems from an optimization-inference mismatch where standard adversarial defenses assume full-token processing, while the deployed model utilizes a subset of tokens selected via importance metrics (typically attention scores).

On the Adversarial Robustness of Large Vision-Language Models under Visual Token Compression
Evaluated models: LLaVA 1.5 7B

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2025
Analyzed 3/8/2026

Open-weight Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to a white-box safety alignment bypass known as "abliteration" (directional orthogonalization). An attacker with access to the model weights can compute the "refusal direction" in the residual stream activation space by contrasting internal activations between harmful and harmless prompts. By projecting the model's weight matrices to be orthogonal to this single direction (or specific concept cones), the safety alignment is surgically…

Comparative Analysis of LLM Abliteration Methods: A Cross-Architecture Evaluation
Evaluated models: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct, Mistral 7B Instruct v0.3, Qwen 2.5 7B Instruct +13 more

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2025
Analyzed 1/14/2026

Large Language and Vision Assistant (LLaVA) v1.5-13B and Meta Llama 3.2 11B Vision are vulnerable to adversarial evasion attacks targeting the visual input modality. An attacker with white-box access (knowledge of model architecture and gradients) can employ Projected Gradient Descent (PGD) to generate adversarial perturbations constrained by an L-infinity norm. By maximizing the model's internal loss function with respect to the input image, the attacker can force the Vision-Language Model…

Adversarial Robustness of Vision in Open Foundation Models
Evaluated models: LLaVA 1.5 13B, Llama 3.2 11B Vision

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2025
Analyzed 12/30/2025

Large Language Models (LLMs) finetuned from open-weight pretrained sources inherit adversarial vulnerabilities encoded in the pretrained model's internal representations. An attacker with white-box access to a pretrained model (e.g., Llama-2, Llama-3) can identify linearly separable features in the hidden states that correlate with "transferable" jailbreak prompts. By exploiting these features using a Probe-Guided Projection (PGP) attack, the attacker can optimize adversarial suffixes on the…

One Leak Away: How Pretrained Model Exposure Amplifies Jailbreak Risks in Finetuned LLMs
Evaluated models: Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3 8B Instruct, DeepSeek LLM 7B Chat +5 more

Source: arXiv

Published 12/1/2025
Analyzed 3/8/2026

Reasoning-specialized Large Language Models (LLMs) that utilize Chain-of-Thought (CoT) processes are vulnerable to reasoning-exploitation jailbreaks. Attackers can bypass standard safety alignments (such as RLHF) by using adaptive multi-turn interactions or semantic transformations to induce the model to generate intermediate reasoning steps that "rationalize" or "contextualize" a harmful request. Because current alignment techniques often fail to scale linearly with reasoning depth, forcing…

TeleAI-Safety: A comprehensive LLM jailbreaking benchmark towards attacks, defenses, and evaluations
Evaluated models: GPT-5, GPT-4.1, GPT-4.1 Mini +11 more

Source: arXiv

Published 11/1/2025
Analyzed 3/8/2026

A white-box vulnerability exists in the safety alignment mechanisms of instruction-tuned Large Language Models (LLMs) due to the decoupling of the refusal mechanism into two distinct, manipulable vectors in the activation space: the Harm Detection Direction and the Refusal Execution Direction. An attacker with access to the model's internal hidden states during inference can bypass safety guardrails using a technique called Differentiated Bi-Directional Intervention (DBDI). By intercepting the…

Differentiated Directional Intervention: A Framework for Evading LLM Safety Alignment
Evaluated models: Llama 3.2 3B, Llama 2 7B Chat, Llama 3.1 8B +4 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.