Chain-of-Lure: A Synthetic Narrative-Driven Approach to Compromise Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.17519v1
• Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 06:19:05 GMT
• Title: Chain-of-Lure: A Synthetic Narrative-Driven Approach to Compromise Large Language Models
• Authors: Wenhan Chang, Tianqing Zhu, Yu Zhao, Shuangyong Song, Ping Xiong, Wanlei Zhou, Yongxiang Li,
• Abstract summary: We propose a novel jailbreaking method inspired by the Chain-of-Thought mechanism.<n>The attacker model uses mission transfer to conceal harmful user intent in dialogue and generates chained narrative lures to stimulate the reasoning capabilities of victim models.<n>Our experiments reveal that models with weaker safety mechanisms exhibit stronger attack capabilities, demonstrating that models can not only be exploited, but also help harm others.
• Score: 15.134149399922192
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In the era of rapid generative AI development, interactions between humans and large language models face significant misusing risks. Previous research has primarily focused on black-box scenarios using human-guided prompts and white-box scenarios leveraging gradient-based LLM generation methods, neglecting the possibility that LLMs can act not only as victim models, but also as attacker models to harm other models. We proposes a novel jailbreaking method inspired by the Chain-of-Thought mechanism, where the attacker model uses mission transfer to conceal harmful user intent in dialogue and generates chained narrative lures to stimulate the reasoning capabilities of victim models, leading to successful jailbreaking. To enhance the attack success rate, we introduce a helper model that performs random narrative optimization on the narrative lures during multi-turn dialogues while ensuring alignment with the original intent, enabling the optimized lures to bypass the safety barriers of victim models effectively. Our experiments reveal that models with weaker safety mechanisms exhibit stronger attack capabilities, demonstrating that models can not only be exploited, but also help harm others. By incorporating toxicity scores, we employ third-party models to evaluate the harmfulness of victim models' responses to jailbreaking attempts. The study shows that using refusal keywords as an evaluation metric for attack success rates is significantly flawed because it does not assess whether the responses guide harmful questions, while toxicity scores measure the harm of generated content with more precision and its alignment with harmful questions. Our approach demonstrates outstanding performance, uncovering latent vulnerabilities in LLMs and providing data-driven feedback to optimize LLM safety mechanisms. We also discuss two defensive strategies to offer guidance on improving defense mechanisms.

Related papers

• Wolf Hidden in Sheep's Conversations: Toward Harmless Data-Based Backdoor Attacks for Jailbreaking Large Language Models [69.11679786018206]
  Supervised fine-tuning (SFT) aligns large language models with human intent by training them on labeled task-specific data.<n>Recent studies have shown that malicious attackers can inject backdoors into these models by embedding triggers into the harmful question-answer pairs.<n>We propose a novel clean-data backdoor attack for jailbreaking LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T08:13:59Z)
• Cannot See the Forest for the Trees: Invoking Heuristics and Biases to Elicit Irrational Choices of LLMs [83.11815479874447]
  We propose a novel jailbreak attack framework, inspired by cognitive decomposition and biases in human cognition.<n>We employ cognitive decomposition to reduce the complexity of malicious prompts and relevance bias to reorganize prompts.<n>We also introduce a ranking-based harmfulness evaluation metric that surpasses the traditional binary success-or-failure paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T05:28:11Z)
• Benchmarking Adversarial Robustness to Bias Elicitation in Large Language Models: Scalable Automated Assessment with LLM-as-a-Judge [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized artificial intelligence, driving advancements in machine translation, summarization, and conversational agents.<n>Recent studies indicate that LLMs remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks designed to elicit biased responses.<n>This work proposes a scalable benchmarking framework to evaluate LLM robustness against adversarial bias elicitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T16:00:59Z)
• MIRAGE: Multimodal Immersive Reasoning and Guided Exploration for Red-Team Jailbreak Attacks [85.3303135160762]
  MIRAGE is a novel framework that exploits narrative-driven context and role immersion to circumvent safety mechanisms in Multimodal Large Language Models.<n>It achieves state-of-the-art performance, improving attack success rates by up to 17.5% over the best baselines.<n>We demonstrate that role immersion and structured semantic reconstruction can activate inherent model biases, facilitating the model's spontaneous violation of ethical safeguards.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-24T20:38:42Z)
• How Jailbreak Defenses Work and Ensemble? A Mechanistic Investigation [39.44000290664494]
  Jailbreak attacks, where harmful prompts bypass generative models' built-in safety, raise serious concerns about model vulnerability.<n>This paper systematically examines jailbreak defenses by reframing the standard generation task as a binary classification problem.<n>We identify two key defense mechanisms: safety shift, which increases refusal rates across all queries, and harmfulness discrimination, which improves the model's ability to distinguish between harmful and benign inputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-20T12:07:40Z)
• Reasoning-Augmented Conversation for Multi-Turn Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models [53.580928907886324]
  Reasoning-Augmented Conversation is a novel multi-turn jailbreak framework.<n>It reformulates harmful queries into benign reasoning tasks.<n>We show that RACE achieves state-of-the-art attack effectiveness in complex conversational scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-16T09:27:44Z)
• Model Tampering Attacks Enable More Rigorous Evaluations of LLM Capabilities [49.09703018511403]
  Evaluations of large language model (LLM) risks and capabilities are increasingly being incorporated into AI risk management and governance frameworks.<n>Currently, most risk evaluations are conducted by designing inputs that elicit harmful behaviors from the system.<n>We propose evaluating LLMs with model tampering attacks which allow for modifications to latent activations or weights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-03T18:59:16Z)
• Turning Logic Against Itself : Probing Model Defenses Through Contrastive Questions [51.51850981481236]
  We introduce POATE, a novel jailbreak technique that harnesses contrastive reasoning to provoke unethical responses.<n>PoATE crafts semantically opposing intents and integrates them with adversarial templates, steering models toward harmful outputs with remarkable subtlety.<n>To counter this, we propose Intent-Aware CoT and Reverse Thinking CoT, which decompose queries to detect malicious intent and reason in reverse to evaluate and reject harmful responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-03T15:40:03Z)
• Chain of Attack: On the Robustness of Vision-Language Models Against Transfer-Based Adversarial Attacks [34.40254709148148]
  Pre-trained vision-language models (VLMs) have showcased remarkable performance in image and natural language understanding. Their potential safety and robustness issues raise concerns that adversaries may evade the system and cause these models to generate toxic content through malicious attacks. We present Chain of Attack (CoA), which iteratively enhances the generation of adversarial examples based on the multi-modal semantic update.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-24T05:28:07Z)
• The Dark Side of Human Feedback: Poisoning Large Language Models via User Inputs [8.449922248196705]
  We present a subtle yet effective poisoning attack via user-supplied prompts to penetrate alignment training protections. Our attack, even without explicit knowledge about the target LLMs in the black-box setting, subtly alters the reward feedback mechanism. By injecting 1% of these specially crafted prompts into the data, through malicious users, we demonstrate a toxicity score up to two times higher when a specific trigger word is used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-01T17:40:04Z)
• Jailbreaking as a Reward Misspecification Problem [80.52431374743998]
  We propose a novel perspective that attributes this vulnerability to reward misspecification during the alignment process.<n>We introduce a metric ReGap to quantify the extent of reward misspecification and demonstrate its effectiveness.<n>We present ReMiss, a system for automated red teaming that generates adversarial prompts in a reward-misspecified space.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T15:12:27Z)
• SA-Attack: Improving Adversarial Transferability of Vision-Language Pre-training Models via Self-Augmentation [56.622250514119294]
  In contrast to white-box adversarial attacks, transfer attacks are more reflective of real-world scenarios. We propose a self-augment-based transfer attack method, termed SA-Attack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T09:08:50Z)

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.