arXiv AI

Same Attack, Different Judge: A First Controlled Adversarial Comparison of Jev, LLM Judges, and Purpose-Built Safety Classifiers

The paper evaluates TypeSafe AI’s Jev safety judge against GPT and GLM judges and local classifiers using a controlled adversarial test harness. Jev shows strong robustness on rule‑based tasks like input moderation, with minimal bypasses, but performs less well on judgment‑based tasks such as phishing detection, where it misses a higher proportion of phishing emails and is more prone to false positives. The study highlights Jev’s speed advantage and varying resilience depending on task type.

arXiv AI
Oct 7

Where Rules End and Judges Begin: Measuring the Judgment Boundary in Multi-Agent Systems Security

The paper introduces DEFER1, a deterministic-first enforcement system for large‑language‑model based multi‑agent systems that uses 28 checks to block most attacks and refers only a small fraction to human judges. In tests across four domains, DEFER1 reduces attack success from about 30% to roughly 3%, with 78% of attacks blocked deterministically and only a quarter reaching the judges. The study highlights that rules effectively handle clear policy violations while judges address ambiguous intent, but also reveals weaknesses such as a risk‑score gate that misclassifies many proposals.

By Shaswata Mitra, Raj Patel, Subash Neupane, Sudip Mittal, Md Rayhanur Rahman, Shahram Rahimi
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 2

Inference-Layer Security: Defending Against Adversarial Inference and Infrastructure Abuse

The paper presents a study on securing large language model (LLM) inference services against adversarial use, such as jailbreaking, denial‑of‑service, and distillation attacks. It introduces a structural causal model to generate a realistic, labeled dataset of user sessions, including coordinated multi‑account campaigns and varying label observability. Using this dataset, the authors train a gradient‑boosted detector that achieves near‑perfect binary classification on oracle labels but shows lower performance on operational labels, and they demonstrate a simple thresholded engine that improves attack‑type attribution accuracy.

By Keifer Lee
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 25

How Reliable Is Your Jailbreak Judge? Calibration and Adversarial Robustness of Automated ASR Scoring

arXiv:2606. 25487v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Almost every paper on LLM jailbreaks and prompt injection reports an attack-success rate (ASR), and that number is assigned not by people but by an automated judge: either a safety classifier trained for the task, or a general chat model prompted to grade.

By Yang Gao (Veyon Solutions)
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 28

Prompt Injection Detection for Email Agents Through Attack Chain Modeling

The paper introduces a prompt‑injection detection framework for email assistants that models attacks as a chain of stages. It combines a text detector, stage‑specific verifiers, rule‑based risk signals, user intent consistency checks, and a logistic decision policy. Experiments on five benchmarks show the framework outperforms pretrained detectors, achieving a mean F1 of 0.406 versus 0.216, and demonstrate that training on benign emails resembling attacks reduces false alarms.

By Ahmad Hashmi, Dhyey Patel, Yunting Yin
arXiv Computation and Language
Sep 3

Counter-GEO-Bench: Evaluating Defenses Against Information-Distorting Generative Engine Optimization

Counter‑GEO‑Bench is a new benchmark that evaluates how well defenses can stop large language models from producing misinformation when faced with generative engine‑optimized (GEO) content. It contains 247 human‑verified queries paired with both information‑preserving and information‑distorting GEO rewrites, and measures attack success rate, false positives, and answer quality across three victim LLMs. The study shows that existing off‑the‑shelf defenses reduce attack success by at most 5.7 %, while a lightweight baseline called C‑GEO Guard cuts success by 47.6 % with minimal loss of utility.

By Bing Zheng, Zongyao Zhao, Wenming Yang
arXiv AI
Sep 28

JevAdvBench: A Benchmark and Black-Box Attacks for Reinforcement Learning for Calibrated Decisions Models

JevAdvBench introduces the first adversarial benchmark for reinforcement‑learning‑based calibrated decision (RLCD) models, providing 812 typed questions across 66 scenarios and a black‑box attack suite of 9,744 single‑edit variants. The benchmark evaluates attacks by comparing each perturbed decision to the model’s own clean decision and to an identical re‑run, revealing that rewording changes decisions by only 1.2 percentage points while certain injected opinions can flip 12.1% of decisions and lower confidence below 0.8 in 38% of cases. These findings demonstrate that RLCD models can be significantly misled by seemingly innocuous input edits, underscoring the need to treat the state as untrusted in applications.

By Jianyi Hu, Hangtao Zhang, Yi Liu, Yeqi Zeng, Li Zeng, Xianlong Wang, Rui Wang, Leo Yu Zhang
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Sep 2

Counter-GEO-Bench: Evaluating Defenses Against Information-Distorting Generative Engine Optimization

Counter‑GEO‑Bench is a new defense benchmark that tests how well systems can resist misinformation generated by generative engine optimization (GEO). It contains 247 human‑verified queries paired with both information‑preserving and information‑distorting GEO rewrites, and evaluates defenses on attack success rate, false positives, and answer quality across three large language models. Existing off‑the‑shelf defenses reduce attack success by at most 5.7%, while a lightweight baseline, C‑GEO Guard, cuts it by 47.6% with minimal loss of utility.

arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 8

Open-Weight LLM Fine-Tuning Defenses are Susceptible to Simple Attacks

The paper examines the vulnerability of open‑weight large language model safeguards that aim to block harmful usage by assuming new harmful behavior arises only through fine‑tuning. It demonstrates that simple, low‑cost attacks—abliteration and prefilling—can significantly increase attack success rates across multiple benchmarks, and proposes an abliteration‑resistant tuning (ART) method that mitigates these attacks. The study shows that safeguarding defenses must be evaluated against a broader range of attack strategies beyond fine‑tuning.

By Kevin Kuo, Virginia Smith, Chhavi Yadav
arXiv AI
Aug 26

ADVERSA: Measuring Multi-Turn Guardrail Degradation and Judge Reliability in Large Language Models

The paper introduces ADVERSA, an automated red‑teaming framework that evaluates large language model safety over multiple turns by tracking continuous compliance trajectories instead of binary jailbreak outcomes. Using a fine‑tuned 70B attacker model and a structured 5‑point rubric, the authors conduct controlled experiments on three frontier victim models, measuring guardrail degradation and judge reliability through a triple‑judge consensus. Results show a 26.7% jailbreak rate with most breaches occurring early, and the study documents inter‑judge agreement, attacker drift, and attacker refusals as key factors affecting safety assessment.

By Harry Owiredu-Ashley