Laundering AI Authority with Adversarial Examples

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.04261v1
• Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 19:55:28 GMT
• Title: Laundering AI Authority with Adversarial Examples
• Abstract summary: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed as trusted authorities.<n>We show that adversarial examples break this assumption, enabling emphAI authority laundering<n>Our attacks do not compromise model alignment; the attack operates entirely at the perceptual level.
• Score: 32.761654180537434
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed as trusted authorities -- fact-checking images on social media, comparing products, and moderating content. Users implicitly trust that these systems perceive the same visual content as they do. We show that adversarial examples break this assumption, enabling \emph{AI authority laundering}: an attacker subtly perturbs an image so that the VLM produces confident and authoritative responses about the \emph{wrong} input. Unlike jailbreaks or prompt injections, our attacks do not compromise model alignment; the attack operates entirely at the perceptual level. We demonstrate that standard attacks against publicly available CLIP models transfer reliably to production VLMs -- including GPT-5.4, Claude Opus~4.6, Gemini~3, and Grok~4.2. Across four attack surfaces, we show that authority laundering can amplify misinformation, disparage individuals, evade content moderation, and manipulate product recommendations. Our attacks have high success rates: In hundreds of attacks targeting identity manipulation and NSFW evasion, we measure success rates of $22 - 100\%$ across six models. No novel attack algorithm is required: basic techniques known for over a decade suffice, establishing a lower bound on attacker capability that should concern defenders. Our results demonstrate that visual adversarial robustness is now a practical -- and still largely unsolved -- safety problem.

Related papers

• Jailbreaking Frontier Foundation Models Through Intention Deception [6.119674554651102]
  Large (vision-) models exhibit remarkable capability but remain highly susceptible to jailbreaking.<n>We introduce a novel multi-turn jailbreaking method that exploits this vulnerability.<n>Our approach also uncovered an additional class of model vulnerability that we call para-jailbreaking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-27T06:12:43Z)
• Making MLLMs Blind: Adversarial Smuggling Attacks in MLLM Content Moderation [54.38271718421492]
  Adversarial smuggling attacks exploit the Human-AI capability gap.<n>It encodes harmful content into human-readable visual formats that remain AI-unreadable.<n>We conduct a preliminary exploration of mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-08T11:13:16Z)
• How Vulnerable Are AI Agents to Indirect Prompt Injections? Insights from a Large-Scale Public Competition [48.32744727426218]
  LLM based agents are increasingly deployed in high stakes settings where they process external data sources such as emails, documents, and code repositories.<n>This creates exposure to indirect prompt injection attacks, where adversarial instructions embedded in external content manipulate agent behavior without user awareness.<n>We present findings from a large scale public red teaming competition evaluating this dual objective across three agent settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T14:49:36Z)
• Invisible Safety Threat: Malicious Finetuning for LLM via Steganography [74.00809267925642]
  A compromised large language model can maintain a facade of proper safety alignment while covertly generating harmful content.<n>We demonstrate this invisible safety threat on GPT-4.1 despite the OpenAI finetuning API's safeguards.<n>We quantitatively evaluate our method on the AdvBench dataset, using Llama-Guard-3-8B for content safety classification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-09T08:48:27Z)
• Multi-Faceted Attack: Exposing Cross-Model Vulnerabilities in Defense-Equipped Vision-Language Models [54.61181161508336]
  We introduce Multi-Faceted Attack (MFA), a framework that exposes general safety vulnerabilities in leading defense-equipped Vision-Language Models (VLMs)<n>The core component of MFA is the Attention-Transfer Attack (ATA), which hides harmful instructions inside a meta task with competing objectives.<n>MFA achieves a 58.5% success rate and consistently outperforms existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-20T07:12:54Z)
• Effective Black-Box Multi-Faceted Attacks Breach Vision Large Language Model Guardrails [32.627286570942445]
  MultiFaceted Attack is an attack framework designed to bypass Multi-Layered Defenses in Vision Large Language Models.<n>It exploits the multimodal nature of VLLMs to inject toxic system prompts through images.<n>It achieves a 61.56% attack success rate, surpassing state-of-the-art methods by at least 42.18%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-09T04:21:27Z)
• Turning Logic Against Itself : Probing Model Defenses Through Contrastive Questions [50.40122190627256]
  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)
• Dissecting Adversarial Robustness of Multimodal LM Agents [70.2077308846307]
  We manually create 200 targeted adversarial tasks and evaluation scripts in a realistic threat model on top of VisualWebArena.<n>We find that we can successfully break latest agents that use black-box frontier LMs, including those that perform reflection and tree search.<n>We also use ARE to rigorously evaluate how the robustness changes as new components are added.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-18T17:32:48Z)
• SpeechGuard: Exploring the Adversarial Robustness of Multimodal Large Language Models [34.557309967708406]
  In this work, we investigate the potential vulnerabilities of such instruction-following speech-language models to adversarial attacks and jailbreaking. We design algorithms that can generate adversarial examples to jailbreak SLMs in both white-box and black-box attack settings without human involvement. Our models, trained on dialog data with speech instructions, achieve state-of-the-art performance on spoken question-answering task, scoring over 80% on both safety and helpfulness metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-14T04:51:23Z)
• Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail? [92.8748773632051]
  "jailbreak" attacks on early releases of ChatGPT elicit undesired behavior. We investigate why such attacks succeed and how they can be created. New attacks utilizing our failure modes succeed on every prompt in a collection of unsafe requests.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-05T17:58:10Z)
• Visual Adversarial Examples Jailbreak Aligned Large Language Models [66.53468356460365]
  We show that the continuous and high-dimensional nature of the visual input makes it a weak link against adversarial attacks. We exploit visual adversarial examples to circumvent the safety guardrail of aligned LLMs with integrated vision. Our study underscores the escalating adversarial risks associated with the pursuit of multimodality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T22:13:03Z)

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.