Exploring the Secondary Risks of Large Language Models
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.12382v2
- Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 07:39:53 GMT
- Title: Exploring the Secondary Risks of Large Language Models
- Authors: Jiawei Chen, Zhengwei Fang, Xiao Yang, Chao Yu, Zhaoxia Yin, Hang Su,
- Abstract summary: We introduce secondary risks marked by harmful or misleading behaviors during benign prompts.<n>Unlike adversarial attacks, these risks stem from imperfect generalization and often evade standard safety mechanisms.<n>We propose SecLens, a black-box, multi-objective search framework that efficiently elicits secondary risk behaviors.
- Score: 17.845215420030467
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: Ensuring the safety and alignment of Large Language Models is a significant challenge with their growing integration into critical applications and societal functions. While prior research has primarily focused on jailbreak attacks, less attention has been given to non-adversarial failures that subtly emerge during benign interactions. We introduce secondary risks a novel class of failure modes marked by harmful or misleading behaviors during benign prompts. Unlike adversarial attacks, these risks stem from imperfect generalization and often evade standard safety mechanisms. To enable systematic evaluation, we introduce two risk primitives verbose response and speculative advice that capture the core failure patterns. Building on these definitions, we propose SecLens, a black-box, multi-objective search framework that efficiently elicits secondary risk behaviors by optimizing task relevance, risk activation, and linguistic plausibility. To support reproducible evaluation, we release SecRiskBench, a benchmark dataset of 650 prompts covering eight diverse real-world risk categories. Experimental results from extensive evaluations on 16 popular models demonstrate that secondary risks are widespread, transferable across models, and modality independent, emphasizing the urgent need for enhanced safety mechanisms to address benign yet harmful LLM behaviors in real-world deployments.
Related papers
- ROSE: Toward Reality-Oriented Safety Evaluation of Large Language Models [60.28667314609623]
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as black-box components in real-world applications.<n>We propose Reality-Oriented Safety Evaluation (ROSE), a novel framework that uses multi-objective reinforcement learning to fine-tune an adversarial LLM.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-17T10:55:17Z) - Align is not Enough: Multimodal Universal Jailbreak Attack against Multimodal Large Language Models [83.80177564873094]
We propose a unified multimodal universal jailbreak attack framework.<n>We evaluate the undesirable context generation of MLLMs like LLaVA, Yi-VL, MiniGPT4, MiniGPT-v2, and InstructBLIP.<n>This study underscores the urgent need for robust safety measures in MLLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-02T04:33:56Z) - Beyond Safe Answers: A Benchmark for Evaluating True Risk Awareness in Large Reasoning Models [29.569220030102986]
We introduce textbfBeyond Safe Answers (BSA) bench, a novel benchmark comprising 2,000 challenging instances organized into three distinct SSA scenario types.<n> Evaluations of 19 state-of-the-art LRMs demonstrate the difficulty of this benchmark, with top-performing models achieving only 38.0% accuracy in correctly identifying risk rationales.<n>Our work provides a comprehensive assessment tool for evaluating and improving safety reasoning fidelity in LRMs, advancing the development of genuinely risk-aware and reliably safe AI systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-26T08:49:19Z) - Safety Alignment Can Be Not Superficial With Explicit Safety Signals [8.297367440457508]
Recent studies on the safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) have revealed that existing approaches often operate superficially.<n>This paper identifies a fundamental cause of this superficiality: existing alignment approaches presume that models can implicitly learn a safety-related reasoning task during the alignment process.<n>By explicitly introducing a safety-related binary classification task and integrating its signals with our attention and decoding strategies, we eliminate this ambiguity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-19T20:40:46Z) - 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) - SafeMLRM: Demystifying Safety in Multi-modal Large Reasoning Models [50.34706204154244]
Acquiring reasoning capabilities catastrophically degrades inherited safety alignment.<n>Certain scenarios suffer 25 times higher attack rates.<n>Despite tight reasoning-answer safety coupling, MLRMs demonstrate nascent self-correction.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-09T06:53:23Z) - Representation Bending for Large Language Model Safety [27.842146980762934]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools, but their inherent safety risks pose significant challenges.<n>This paper introduces RepBend, a novel approach that fundamentally disrupts the representations underlying harmful behaviors in LLMs.<n>RepBend achieves state-of-the-art performance, outperforming prior methods such as Circuit Breaker, RMU, and NPO, with up to 95% reduction in attack success rates.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-04-02T09:47:01Z) - 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) - A Formal Framework for Assessing and Mitigating Emergent Security Risks in Generative AI Models: Bridging Theory and Dynamic Risk Mitigation [0.3413711585591077]
As generative AI systems, including large language models (LLMs) and diffusion models, advance rapidly, their growing adoption has led to new and complex security risks.
This paper introduces a novel formal framework for categorizing and mitigating these emergent security risks.
We identify previously under-explored risks, including latent space exploitation, multi-modal cross-attack vectors, and feedback-loop-induced model degradation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-15T02:51:32Z) - C-RAG: Certified Generation Risks for Retrieval-Augmented Language Models [57.10361282229501]
We propose C-RAG, the first framework to certify generation risks for RAG models.
Specifically, we provide conformal risk analysis for RAG models and certify an upper confidence bound of generation risks.
We prove that RAG achieves a lower conformal generation risk than that of a single LLM when the quality of the retrieval model and transformer is non-trivial.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-05T16:46:16Z)
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.