A False Sense of Safety: Unsafe Information Leakage in 'Safe' AI Responses
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper examines "unsafe information leakage" in AI responses that are intended to be "safe"
- The authors investigate how AI models can inadvertently reveal sensitive or dangerous information, even when designed with safety constraints
- They demonstrate that existing techniques for making AI responses "safe" may not be sufficient to prevent harmful information leakage
Plain English Explanation
AI systems are increasingly being used to generate responses to user prompts, with the goal of providing helpful and "safe" information. However, this paper argues that even supposedly "safe" AI responses can inadvertently leak sensitive or dangerous information.
The authors use internal link: "demonstrate that existing techniques for making AI responses 'safe' may not be sufficient to prevent harmful information leakage". They show how AI models can learn to produce responses that seem benign on the surface, but actually contain subtle cues or hidden implications that could be misused by bad actors.
For example, an AI assistant might be asked how to make a simple device, and respond with instructions that seem innocent. But the response could inadvertently reveal enough technical details that a malicious user could use the information to construct something more dangerous, like a weapon. Use internal link: "The authors investigate how AI models can inadvertently reveal sensitive or dangerous information, even when designed with safety constraints".
The paper highlights the challenge of creating truly "safe" AI systems that can reliably avoid these kinds of unintended information leaks. It suggests that more advanced techniques, beyond just filtering or restricting outputs, may be needed to address this issue. Use internal link: "The authors investigate how AI models can inadvertently reveal sensitive or dangerous information, even when designed with safety constraints".
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a detailed investigation into the problem of "unsafe information leakage" in AI responses that are intended to be "safe". The authors demonstrate that even when AI systems are designed with explicit safety constraints, they can still inadvertently reveal sensitive or dangerous information through subtle cues or implications in their outputs.
Through a series of experiments, the researchers show how existing techniques for making AI responses "safe", such as output filtering and restricted training data, are not sufficient to prevent these kinds of information leaks. They examine how AI models can learn to produce responses that seem benign on the surface, but actually contain hidden details that could be misused by bad actors.
For example, the authors describe scenarios where an AI assistant might be asked about how to build a simple device, and respond with instructions that appear innocent, but could still provide enough technical details for a malicious user to construct something more dangerous, like a weapon. Use internal link: "The authors demonstrate that even when AI systems are designed with explicit safety constraints, they can still inadvertently reveal sensitive or dangerous information through subtle cues or implications in their outputs".
The paper suggests that more advanced techniques, beyond just filtering or restricting outputs, may be needed to address this challenge of creating truly "safe" AI systems that can reliably avoid unintended information leaks. Use internal link: "The paper highlights the challenge of creating truly 'safe' AI systems that can reliably avoid these kinds of unintended information leaks".
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important concerns about the limitations of current approaches to making AI responses "safe". While the authors demonstrate the problem of unsafe information leakage in a compelling way, they do not provide a clear solution or path forward.
One key limitation of the research is that it focuses on a relatively narrow set of scenarios and AI capabilities. The authors acknowledge that their experiments may not fully capture the complexity and diversity of real-world AI applications and user interactions.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the underlying mechanisms and biases within AI models that contribute to this problem. A more thorough investigation of the technical factors at play could help inform the development of more robust safety measures. Use internal link: "The paper raises important concerns about the limitations of current approaches to making AI responses 'safe', but does not provide a clear solution or path forward".
Overall, this research highlights a critical challenge in the field of AI safety that warrants further study and innovation. Addressing the issue of unsafe information leakage will be crucial as AI systems become more widely deployed in sensitive domains. Use internal link: "Addressing the issue of unsafe information leakage will be crucial as AI systems become more widely deployed in sensitive domains".
Conclusion
This paper presents a concerning problem with the safety of AI responses, even when they are designed to be "safe". The authors demonstrate that existing techniques for constraining AI outputs are not sufficient to prevent the inadvertent leakage of sensitive or dangerous information.
The research underscores the need for more advanced approaches to ensuring the safety and reliability of AI systems, particularly as they are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications. While the paper does not provide a clear solution, it highlights an important challenge that the AI research community must continue to address. Use internal link: "The research underscores the need for more advanced approaches to ensuring the safety and reliability of AI systems, particularly as they are increasingly deployed in high-stakes applications".
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
A False Sense of Safety: Unsafe Information Leakage in 'Safe' AI Responses
David Glukhov, Ziwen Han, Ilia Shumailov, Vardan Papyan, Nicolas Papernot
Large Language Models (LLMs) are vulnerable to jailbreaks$unicode{x2013}$methods to elicit harmful or generally impermissible outputs. Safety measures are developed and assessed on their effectiveness at defending against jailbreak attacks, indicating a belief that safety is equivalent to robustness. We assert that current defense mechanisms, such as output filters and alignment fine-tuning, are, and will remain, fundamentally insufficient for ensuring model safety. These defenses fail to address risks arising from dual-intent queries and the ability to composite innocuous outputs to achieve harmful goals. To address this critical gap, we introduce an information-theoretic threat model called inferential adversaries who exploit impermissible information leakage from model outputs to achieve malicious goals. We distinguish these from commonly studied security adversaries who only seek to force victim models to generate specific impermissible outputs. We demonstrate the feasibility of automating inferential adversaries through question decomposition and response aggregation. To provide safety guarantees, we define an information censorship criterion for censorship mechanisms, bounding the leakage of impermissible information. We propose a defense mechanism which ensures this bound and reveal an intrinsic safety-utility trade-off. Our work provides the first theoretically grounded understanding of the requirements for releasing safe LLMs and the utility costs involved.
Read more7/4/2024
0
Large Language Models Are Involuntary Truth-Tellers: Exploiting Fallacy Failure for Jailbreak Attacks
Yue Zhou, Henry Peng Zou, Barbara Di Eugenio, Yang Zhang
We find that language models have difficulties generating fallacious and deceptive reasoning. When asked to generate deceptive outputs, language models tend to leak honest counterparts but believe them to be false. Exploiting this deficiency, we propose a jailbreak attack method that elicits an aligned language model for malicious output. Specifically, we query the model to generate a fallacious yet deceptively real procedure for the harmful behavior. Since a fallacious procedure is generally considered fake and thus harmless by LLMs, it helps bypass the safeguard mechanism. Yet the output is factually harmful since the LLM cannot fabricate fallacious solutions but proposes truthful ones. We evaluate our approach over five safety-aligned large language models, comparing four previous jailbreak methods, and show that our approach achieves competitive performance with more harmful outputs. We believe the findings could be extended beyond model safety, such as self-verification and hallucination.
Read more7/2/2024
0
SLM as Guardian: Pioneering AI Safety with Small Language Models
Ohjoon Kwon, Donghyeon Jeon, Nayoung Choi, Gyu-Hwung Cho, Changbong Kim, Hyunwoo Lee, Inho Kang, Sun Kim, Taiwoo Park
Most prior safety research of large language models (LLMs) has focused on enhancing the alignment of LLMs to better suit the safety requirements of humans. However, internalizing such safeguard features into larger models brought challenges of higher training cost and unintended degradation of helpfulness. To overcome such challenges, a modular approach employing a smaller LLM to detect harmful user queries is regarded as a convenient solution in designing LLM-based system with safety requirements. In this paper, we leverage a smaller LLM for both harmful query detection and safeguard response generation. We introduce our safety requirements and the taxonomy of harmfulness categories, and then propose a multi-task learning mechanism fusing the two tasks into a single model. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach, providing on par or surpassing harmful query detection and safeguard response performance compared to the publicly available LLMs.
Read more5/31/2024
0
Probing the Safety Response Boundary of Large Language Models via Unsafe Decoding Path Generation
Haoyu Wang, Bingzhe Wu, Yatao Bian, Yongzhe Chang, Xueqian Wang, Peilin Zhao
Large Language Models (LLMs) are implicit troublemakers. While they provide valuable insights and assist in problem-solving, they can also potentially serve as a resource for malicious activities. Implementing safety alignment could mitigate the risk of LLMs generating harmful responses. We argue that: even when an LLM appears to successfully block harmful queries, there may still be hidden vulnerabilities that could act as ticking time bombs. To identify these underlying weaknesses, we propose to use a cost value model as both a detector and an attacker. Trained on external or self-generated harmful datasets, the cost value model could successfully influence the original safe LLM to output toxic content in decoding process. For instance, LLaMA-2-chat 7B outputs 39.18% concrete toxic content, along with only 22.16% refusals without any harmful suffixes. These potential weaknesses can then be exploited via prompt optimization such as soft prompts on images. We name this decoding strategy: Jailbreak Value Decoding (JVD), emphasizing that seemingly secure LLMs may not be as safe as we initially believe. They could be used to gather harmful data or launch covert attacks.
Read more8/27/2024