A Comprehensive Study of Jailbreak Attack versus Defense for Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.13457v2
• Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 05:00:24 GMT
• Title: A Comprehensive Study of Jailbreak Attack versus Defense for Large Language Models
• Authors: Zihao Xu, Yi Liu, Gelei Deng, Yuekang Li, Stjepan Picek,
• Abstract summary: We investigate nine attack techniques and seven defense techniques applied across three distinct language models: Vicuna, LLama, and GPT-3.5 Turbo. Our findings reveal that existing white-box attacks underperform compared to universal techniques and that including special tokens in the input significantly affects the likelihood of successful attacks.
• Score: 20.40158210837289
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMS) have increasingly become central to generating content with potential societal impacts. Notably, these models have demonstrated capabilities for generating content that could be deemed harmful. To mitigate these risks, researchers have adopted safety training techniques to align model outputs with societal values to curb the generation of malicious content. However, the phenomenon of "jailbreaking", where carefully crafted prompts elicit harmful responses from models, persists as a significant challenge. This research conducts a comprehensive analysis of existing studies on jailbreaking LLMs and their defense techniques. We meticulously investigate nine attack techniques and seven defense techniques applied across three distinct language models: Vicuna, LLama, and GPT-3.5 Turbo. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of these attack and defense techniques. Our findings reveal that existing white-box attacks underperform compared to universal techniques and that including special tokens in the input significantly affects the likelihood of successful attacks. This research highlights the need to concentrate on the security facets of LLMs. Additionally, we contribute to the field by releasing our datasets and testing framework, aiming to foster further research into LLM security. We believe these contributions will facilitate the exploration of security measures within this domain.

Related papers

• Safety at Scale: A Comprehensive Survey of Large Model Safety [299.801463557549]
  We present a comprehensive taxonomy of safety threats to large models, including adversarial attacks, data poisoning, backdoor attacks, jailbreak and prompt injection attacks, energy-latency attacks, data and model extraction attacks, and emerging agent-specific threats. We identify and discuss the open challenges in large model safety, emphasizing the need for comprehensive safety evaluations, scalable and effective defense mechanisms, and sustainable data practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-02T05:14:22Z)
• You Can't Eat Your Cake and Have It Too: The Performance Degradation of LLMs with Jailbreak Defense [34.023473699165315]
  We study the utility degradation, safety elevation, and exaggerated-safety escalation of LLMs with jailbreak defense strategies. We find that mainstream jailbreak defenses fail to ensure both safety and performance simultaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-21T15:24:29Z)
• The VLLM Safety Paradox: Dual Ease in Jailbreak Attack and Defense [56.32083100401117]
  We investigate why Vision Large Language Models (VLLMs) are prone to jailbreak attacks. We then make a key observation: existing defense mechanisms suffer from an textbfover-prudence problem. We find that the two representative evaluation methods for jailbreak often exhibit chance agreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-13T07:57:19Z)
• Iterative Self-Tuning LLMs for Enhanced Jailbreaking Capabilities [63.603861880022954]
  We introduce ADV-LLM, an iterative self-tuning process that crafts adversarial LLMs with enhanced jailbreak ability. Our framework significantly reduces the computational cost of generating adversarial suffixes while achieving nearly 100% ASR on various open-source LLMs. It exhibits strong attack transferability to closed-source models, achieving 99% ASR on GPT-3.5 and 49% ASR on GPT-4, despite being optimized solely on Llama3.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T06:36:12Z)
• Jailbreaking and Mitigation of Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models [4.564507064383306]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed artificial intelligence by advancing natural language understanding and generation. Despite these advancements, LLMs have shown considerable vulnerabilities, particularly to prompt injection and jailbreaking attacks. This review analyzes the state of research on these vulnerabilities and presents available defense strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-20T00:00:56Z)
• A Survey of Attacks on Large Vision-Language Models: Resources, Advances, and Future Trends [78.3201480023907]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a wide range of multimodal understanding and reasoning tasks. The vulnerability of LVLMs is relatively underexplored, posing potential security risks in daily usage. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive review of the various forms of existing LVLM attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T06:57:58Z)
• Breaking Down the Defenses: A Comparative Survey of Attacks on Large Language Models [18.624280305864804]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become a cornerstone in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP) This paper presents a comprehensive survey of the various forms of attacks targeting LLMs. We delve into topics such as adversarial attacks that aim to manipulate model outputs, data poisoning that affects model training, and privacy concerns related to training data exploitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-03T04:46:21Z)
• Revisiting Jailbreaking for Large Language Models: A Representation Engineering Perspective [43.94115802328438]
  Recent surge in jailbreaking attacks has revealed significant vulnerabilities in Large Language Models (LLMs) when exposed to malicious inputs. We suggest that the self-safeguarding capability of LLMs is linked to specific activity patterns within their representation space. Our findings demonstrate that these patterns can be detected with just a few pairs of contrastive queries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T00:50:04Z)
• Benchmarking and Defending Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks on Large Language Models [79.0183835295533]
  We introduce the first benchmark for indirect prompt injection attacks, named BIPIA, to assess the risk of such vulnerabilities. Our analysis identifies two key factors contributing to their success: LLMs' inability to distinguish between informational context and actionable instructions, and their lack of awareness in avoiding the execution of instructions within external content. We propose two novel defense mechanisms-boundary awareness and explicit reminder-to address these vulnerabilities in both black-box and white-box settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-21T01:08:39Z)
• A Comprehensive Survey of Attack Techniques, Implementation, and Mitigation Strategies in Large Language Models [0.0]
  This article explores two attack categories: attacks on models themselves and attacks on model applications. The former requires expertise, access to model data, and significant implementation time. The latter is more accessible to attackers and has seen increased attention.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-18T07:07:32Z)
• Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Models [109.75753454188705]
  Recent work shows that text moderations can produce jailbreaking prompts that bypass defenses. We look at three types of defenses: detection (perplexity based), input preprocessing (paraphrase and retokenization), and adversarial training. We find that the weakness of existing discretes for text, combined with the relatively high costs of optimization, makes standard adaptive attacks more challenging for LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-01T17:59:44Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.