Subtoxic Questions: Dive Into Attitude Change of LLM's Response in Jailbreak Attempts
2404.08309
0
0
Abstract
As Large Language Models (LLMs) of Prompt Jailbreaking are getting more and more attention, it is of great significance to raise a generalized research paradigm to evaluate attack strengths and a basic model to conduct subtler experiments. In this paper, we propose a novel approach by focusing on a set of target questions that are inherently more sensitive to jailbreak prompts, aiming to circumvent the limitations posed by enhanced LLM security. Through designing and analyzing these sensitive questions, this paper reveals a more effective method of identifying vulnerabilities in LLMs, thereby contributing to the advancement of LLM security. This research not only challenges existing jailbreaking methodologies but also fortifies LLMs against potential exploits.
Get summaries of the top AI research delivered straight to your inbox:
Overview
- This paper explores the "subtoxic question" phenomenon, where language models (LLMs) may exhibit changes in their responses when faced with jailbreak attempts.
- The researchers investigate how LLMs' attitudes and behaviors can shift in response to subtoxic questions, which are designed to circumvent safety measures and push the model towards undesirable actions.
- The paper introduces the GAC (Generalized Attitude Change) model, a framework for understanding and predicting attitude changes in LLMs during jailbreak attempts.
Plain English Explanation
The paper examines a problem called "subtoxic questions" that can affect how language models (LLMs) respond when people try to "jailbreak" or bypass the model's safety features. Jailbreaking refers to attempts to get an LLM to do something it's not supposed to do, like saying harmful things.
The researchers use the GAC (Generalized Attitude Change) model to understand how an LLM's attitudes and behaviors can change when faced with subtoxic questions. Subtoxic questions are designed to trick the model into changing its responses in undesirable ways, even if the questions don't seem overtly harmful.
The goal is to better understand how LLMs can be influenced by subtle prompts and to find ways to make them more robust against these types of jailbreak attempts.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces the concept of "subtoxic questions" and how they can impact the responses of language models (LLMs) during jailbreak attempts. Jailbreaking refers to techniques used to bypass an LLM's safety features and get it to produce undesirable outputs.
The researchers propose the GAC (Generalized Attitude Change) model as a framework for understanding and predicting how an LLM's attitudes and behaviors can shift in response to subtoxic questions. The GAC model suggests that LLMs can exhibit complex attitude changes, including polarization, when faced with subtle prompts designed to circumvent safety measures.
The paper also discusses the JailbreakV benchmark, which is used to assess the robustness of LLMs against various jailbreak techniques, including Generalized Nested Jailbreak Prompts. Additionally, the authors explore strategies for making LLMs more resilient to jailbreak attempts.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a valuable framework for understanding the complex dynamics of how LLMs can be influenced by subtoxic questions during jailbreak attempts. The GAC model offers a promising approach for predicting and mitigating these attitude changes, but it would be helpful to see more empirical validation and testing of the model's accuracy and generalizability.
One limitation of the research is that it focuses primarily on language-based jailbreak attempts, while LLMs are increasingly being used in multimodal settings. It would be valuable to explore how subtoxic prompts and attitude changes might manifest in these more complex, multi-input environments.
Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the ethical implications of these findings. As LLMs become more ubiquitous, it will be crucial to consider the societal impacts of subtle techniques that can influence their behavior, both for good and for ill.
Conclusion
This paper sheds light on the important issue of subtoxic questions and their potential to influence the responses of language models during jailbreak attempts. The GAC model provides a valuable framework for understanding and predicting these attitude changes, which could inform the development of more robust and resilient LLMs.
As the use of LLMs continues to expand, it will be crucial to address the challenges posed by subtoxic questions and other jailbreak techniques. The insights from this research can help guide the development of safety-focused AI systems that are better equipped to withstand subtle attempts to undermine their intended behaviors and outputs.
Related Papers
JailbreakLens: Visual Analysis of Jailbreak Attacks Against Large Language Models
Yingchaojie Feng, Zhizhang Chen, Zhining Kang, Sijia Wang, Minfeng Zhu, Wei Zhang, Wei Chen
0
0
The proliferation of large language models (LLMs) has underscored concerns regarding their security vulnerabilities, notably against jailbreak attacks, where adversaries design jailbreak prompts to circumvent safety mechanisms for potential misuse. Addressing these concerns necessitates a comprehensive analysis of jailbreak prompts to evaluate LLMs' defensive capabilities and identify potential weaknesses. However, the complexity of evaluating jailbreak performance and understanding prompt characteristics makes this analysis laborious. We collaborate with domain experts to characterize problems and propose an LLM-assisted framework to streamline the analysis process. It provides automatic jailbreak assessment to facilitate performance evaluation and support analysis of components and keywords in prompts. Based on the framework, we design JailbreakLens, a visual analysis system that enables users to explore the jailbreak performance against the target model, conduct multi-level analysis of prompt characteristics, and refine prompt instances to verify findings. Through a case study, technical evaluations, and expert interviews, we demonstrate our system's effectiveness in helping users evaluate model security and identify model weaknesses.
4/16/2024
💬
Take a Look at it! Rethinking How to Evaluate Language Model Jailbreak
Hongyu Cai, Arjun Arunasalam, Leo Y. Lin, Antonio Bianchi, Z. Berkay Celik
0
0
Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly integrated with various applications. To ensure that LLMs do not generate unsafe responses, they are aligned with safeguards that specify what content is restricted. However, such alignment can be bypassed to produce prohibited content using a technique commonly referred to as jailbreak. Different systems have been proposed to perform the jailbreak automatically. These systems rely on evaluation methods to determine whether a jailbreak attempt is successful. However, our analysis reveals that current jailbreak evaluation methods have two limitations. (1) Their objectives lack clarity and do not align with the goal of identifying unsafe responses. (2) They oversimplify the jailbreak result as a binary outcome, successful or not. In this paper, we propose three metrics, safeguard violation, informativeness, and relative truthfulness, to evaluate language model jailbreak. Additionally, we demonstrate how these metrics correlate with the goal of different malicious actors. To compute these metrics, we introduce a multifaceted approach that extends the natural language generation evaluation method after preprocessing the response. We evaluate our metrics on a benchmark dataset produced from three malicious intent datasets and three jailbreak systems. The benchmark dataset is labeled by three annotators. We compare our multifaceted approach with three existing jailbreak evaluation methods. Experiments demonstrate that our multifaceted evaluation outperforms existing methods, with F1 scores improving on average by 17% compared to existing baselines. Our findings motivate the need to move away from the binary view of the jailbreak problem and incorporate a more comprehensive evaluation to ensure the safety of the language model.
5/8/2024
Hidden You Malicious Goal Into Benigh Narratives: Jailbreak Large Language Models through Logic Chain Injection
Zhilong Wang, Yebo Cao, Peng Liu
0
0
Jailbreak attacks on Language Model Models (LLMs) entail crafting prompts aimed at exploiting the models to generate malicious content. Existing jailbreak attacks can successfully deceive the LLMs, however they cannot deceive the human. This paper proposes a new type of jailbreak attacks which can deceive both the LLMs and human (i.e., security analyst). The key insight of our idea is borrowed from the social psychology - that is human are easily deceived if the lie is hidden in truth. Based on this insight, we proposed the logic-chain injection attacks to inject malicious intention into benign truth. Logic-chain injection attack firstly dissembles its malicious target into a chain of benign narrations, and then distribute narrations into a related benign article, with undoubted facts. In this way, newly generate prompt cannot only deceive the LLMs, but also deceive human.
4/9/2024
Don't Say No: Jailbreaking LLM by Suppressing Refusal
Yukai Zhou, Wenjie Wang
0
0
Ensuring the safety alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) is crucial to generating responses consistent with human values. Despite their ability to recognize and avoid harmful queries, LLMs are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks, where carefully crafted prompts elicit them to produce toxic content. One category of jailbreak attacks is reformulating the task as adversarial attacks by eliciting the LLM to generate an affirmative response. However, the typical attack in this category GCG has very limited attack success rate. In this study, to better study the jailbreak attack, we introduce the DSN (Don't Say No) attack, which prompts LLMs to not only generate affirmative responses but also novelly enhance the objective to suppress refusals. In addition, another challenge lies in jailbreak attacks is the evaluation, as it is difficult to directly and accurately assess the harmfulness of the attack. The existing evaluation such as refusal keyword matching has its own limitation as it reveals numerous false positive and false negative instances. To overcome this challenge, we propose an ensemble evaluation pipeline incorporating Natural Language Inference (NLI) contradiction assessment and two external LLM evaluators. Extensive experiments demonstrate the potency of the DSN and the effectiveness of ensemble evaluation compared to baseline methods.
4/26/2024