Insights and Current Gaps in Open-Source LLM Vulnerability Scanners: A Comparative Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16527v1
• Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 21:36:03 GMT
• Title: Insights and Current Gaps in Open-Source LLM Vulnerability Scanners: A Comparative Analysis
• Authors: Jonathan Brokman, Omer Hofman, Oren Rachmil, Inderjeet Singh, Rathina Sabapathy, Aishvariya Priya, Vikas Pahuja, Amit Giloni, Roman Vainshtein, Hisashi Kojima,
• Abstract summary: This report presents a comparative analysis of open-source vulnerability scanners for conversational large language models (LLMs) Our study evaluates prominent scanners - Garak, Giskard, PyRIT, and CyberSecEval - that adapt red-teaming practices to expose vulnerabilities.
• Score: 1.466186428814047
• License:
• Abstract: This report presents a comparative analysis of open-source vulnerability scanners for conversational large language models (LLMs). As LLMs become integral to various applications, they also present potential attack surfaces, exposed to security risks such as information leakage and jailbreak attacks. Our study evaluates prominent scanners - Garak, Giskard, PyRIT, and CyberSecEval - that adapt red-teaming practices to expose these vulnerabilities. We detail the distinctive features and practical use of these scanners, outline unifying principles of their design and perform quantitative evaluations to compare them. These evaluations uncover significant reliability issues in detecting successful attacks, highlighting a fundamental gap for future development. Additionally, we contribute a preliminary labelled dataset, which serves as an initial step to bridge this gap. Based on the above, we provide strategic recommendations to assist organizations choose the most suitable scanner for their red-teaming needs, accounting for customizability, test suite comprehensiveness, and industry-specific use cases.

Related papers

• Outside the Comfort Zone: Analysing LLM Capabilities in Software Vulnerability Detection [9.652886240532741]
  This paper thoroughly analyses large language models' capabilities in detecting vulnerabilities within source code. We evaluate the performance of six open-source models that are specifically trained for vulnerability detection against six general-purpose LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-29T10:00:57Z)
• Investigating Coverage Criteria in Large Language Models: An In-Depth Study Through Jailbreak Attacks [10.909463767558023]
  We propose an innovative approach for the real-time detection of jailbreak attacks by utilizing neural activation features. Our method holds promise for future systems integrating LLMs, offering robust real-time detection capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-27T17:14:21Z)
• "Glue pizza and eat rocks" -- Exploiting Vulnerabilities in Retrieval-Augmented Generative Models [74.05368440735468]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generative (RAG) models enhance Large Language Models (LLMs) In this paper, we demonstrate a security threat where adversaries can exploit the openness of these knowledge bases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-26T05:36:23Z)
• Analyzing Adversarial Inputs in Deep Reinforcement Learning [53.3760591018817]
  We present a comprehensive analysis of the characterization of adversarial inputs, through the lens of formal verification. We introduce a novel metric, the Adversarial Rate, to classify models based on their susceptibility to such perturbations. Our analysis empirically demonstrates how adversarial inputs can affect the safety of a given DRL system with respect to such perturbations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T21:58:40Z)
• How Far Have We Gone in Vulnerability Detection Using Large Language Models [15.09461331135668]
  We introduce a comprehensive vulnerability benchmark VulBench. This benchmark aggregates high-quality data from a wide range of CTF challenges and real-world applications. We find that several LLMs outperform traditional deep learning approaches in vulnerability detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-21T08:20:39Z)
• A Survey on Detection of LLMs-Generated Content [97.87912800179531]
  The ability to detect LLMs-generated content has become of paramount importance. We aim to provide a detailed overview of existing detection strategies and benchmarks. We also posit the necessity for a multi-faceted approach to defend against various attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T09:10:26Z)
• ASSERT: Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming for Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models [65.79770974145983]
  ASSERT, Automated Safety Scenario Red Teaming, consists of three methods -- semantically aligned augmentation, target bootstrapping, and adversarial knowledge injection. We partition our prompts into four safety domains for a fine-grained analysis of how the domain affects model performance. We find statistically significant performance differences of up to 11% in absolute classification accuracy among semantically related scenarios and error rates of up to 19% absolute error in zero-shot adversarial settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-14T17:10:28Z)
• Vulnerability Clustering and other Machine Learning Applications of Semantic Vulnerability Embeddings [23.143031911859847]
  We investigated different types of semantic vulnerability embeddings based on natural language processing (NLP) techniques. We also evaluated their use as a foundation for machine learning applications that can support cyber-security researchers and analysts. The particular applications we explored and briefly summarize are clustering, classification, and visualization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-23T21:39:48Z)
• FLIRT: Feedback Loop In-context Red Teaming [71.38594755628581]
  We propose an automatic red teaming framework that evaluates a given model and exposes its vulnerabilities. Our framework uses in-context learning in a feedback loop to red team models and trigger them into unsafe content generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-08T14:03:08Z)
• Poisoning Attacks and Defenses on Artificial Intelligence: A Survey [3.706481388415728]
  Data poisoning attacks represent a type of attack that consists of tampering the data samples fed to the model during the training phase, leading to a degradation in the models accuracy during the inference phase. This work compiles the most relevant insights and findings found in the latest existing literatures addressing this type of attacks. A thorough assessment is performed on the reviewed works, comparing the effects of data poisoning on a wide range of ML models in real-world conditions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-21T14:43:38Z)
• Detection of Adversarial Supports in Few-shot Classifiers Using Feature Preserving Autoencoders and Self-Similarity [89.26308254637702]
  We propose a detection strategy to highlight adversarial support sets. We make use of feature preserving autoencoder filtering and also the concept of self-similarity of a support set to perform this detection. Our method is attack-agnostic and also the first to explore detection for few-shot classifiers to the best of our knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-09T14:13:41Z)

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.