arXiv:2606. 25750v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Safety evaluation of large language models (LLMs) is commonly performed by querying models with unsafe or jailbreak prompts and judging whether their outputs violate a safety policy.
arXiv:2607. 02079v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We present HaloGuard 1.
arXiv:2605. 17173v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models exhibit safety degradation in non-English languages.
arXiv:2607. 10112v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Safety alignment in large language models remains brittle across languages: prompts reliably refused in English can elicit harmful compliance in non-English and low-resource settings.
arXiv:2604. 07223v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) evolve from static chatbots into autonomous agents, the primary vulnerability surface shifts from final outputs to intermediate execution traces.
arXiv:2606. 02959v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Published evaluations of prompt-injection and jailbreak detectors for Large Language Models often suffer from two systematic weaknesses: per-dataset threshold tuning and undisclosed operating points.
The paper introduces BanglaSafe, a benchmark of 879 Bengali prompts that covers 17 culturally grounded harm categories and five prompting conditions. Evaluation of 18 frontier LLMs shows that 53.6% of responses are unsafe or partially unsafe, with 14.7% containing strictly harmful content. The study finds that the writing style within Bengali has a stronger impact on safety than the language switch itself, and that current safety classifiers struggle to reliably evaluate Bengali content.
arXiv:2607. 01859v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety training for large language models (LLMs) is conducted predominantly in English, leaving uncertain how well safety mechanisms generalize to low-resource languages and mixed-language code-switching.
arXiv:2606. 05396v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Producing a labeled vulnerable code at scale is a recurring obstacle for learning-based vulnerability detection: mined corpora carry substantial label noise, and existing LLM-based augmentation propagates these inaccuracies because it transforms vulnerable seeds rather than synthesising vulnerabilities from a specification.
arXiv:2508. 10029v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Safety-aligned large language models can still be manipulated through white-box interventions that modify their internal representations.
arXiv:2607. 01153v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Safety evaluations for language models increasingly depend on judgments about ambiguous natural-language behaviour: whether a model followed an instruction, refused appropriately, complied with a policy, or misreported progress in an agentic task.
arXiv:2605. 03226v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Safety fine-tuning of language models typically requires a curated adversarial dataset.