Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research details
Back to research findings
LMVD-ID: 5b4246ff
Paper published May 1, 2025
Entry analyzed May 31, 2025
Paper-reported evidence
Confidence: Source-linked

The LMVD-ID is an internal research identifier, not an official CVE identifier.

Logic-Based LLM Jailbreak

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety mechanisms based on token-level distribution analysis are vulnerable to a jailbreak attack exploiting distributional discrepancies between alignment data and formally…

BibTeX citation

Paper-evaluated models(7)

DeepSeek R1, DeepSeek V3, GPT-3.5 Turbo +4 more
  • DeepSeek R1
  • DeepSeek V3
  • GPT-3.5 Turbo
  • GPT-4o Mini
  • Llama 3 70B
  • Llama 3 8B
  • Qwen 2.5 7B

Description

Large Language Models (LLMs) employing safety mechanisms based on token-level distribution analysis are vulnerable to a jailbreak attack exploiting distributional discrepancies between alignment data and formally expressed logical statements. The vulnerability allows malicious actors to bypass safety restrictions by translating harmful natural language prompts into equivalent first-order logic expressions. The LLM, trained primarily on natural language, fails to recognize the harmful intent encoded in the logically expressed input which falls outside its expected token distribution.

Examples

See repository at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Logibreak-DEBF (opens in a new tab). The repository contains specific examples of harmful prompts and their logical translations that successfully bypassed safety mechanisms in various LLMs.

Impact

Successful exploitation allows malicious actors to elicit harmful responses from LLMs, including but not limited to: generation of hate speech, misinformation, instructions for illegal activities, and personally identifiable information disclosure. This undermines the intended safety and responsible use of LLMs.

Affected Systems

LLMs implementing safety mechanisms that primarily rely on token-level pattern matching during prompt processing are vulnerable. This includes various closed-source and open-source models. Specific affected models are detailed in the referenced research paper.

Mitigation Steps

  • Develop and implement safety mechanisms that leverage semantic analysis of prompts, in addition to or instead of solely relying on token-level detection.
  • Augment alignment datasets with logically expressed harmful prompts to improve model robustness against this type of attack.
  • Employ multi-stage prompt verification that includes logical parsing and semantic similarity checks before response generation.
  • Investigate and incorporate methods for detecting and mitigating attempts to bypass safety constraints using formal logical representations.

Research context and confidence

Evidence and verification
Paper-reported; independent reproduction is not documented.
Primary research source linked.
Severity
Not rated by this catalog.
Source and publication type
arXiv · Research preprint.
Peer-review status is not provided by this source.
Author and publication status
Author metadata is not stored; see the primary paper.
Threat model and attacker access
Black-box model, service, or application access.
Related deployment categories
No related deployment category is classified.
Taxonomy labels only; paper-specific deployment prerequisites are not inferred.
Affected systems
LLMs implementing safety mechanisms that primarily rely on token-level pattern matching during prompt processing are vulnerable. This includes various closed-source and open-source models. Specific affected models are…

Research Paper

Logic Jailbreak: Efficiently Unlocking LLM Safety Restrictions Through Formal Logical Expression

Primary source: arXiv. Findings are reported by the cited research and have not been independently verified.

View Paper

Evidence

This entry is based on a primary research source. Its findings are paper-reported; independent reproduction and verification are not claimed.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13527