Cited by 44Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningTopic ModelingSecurity and Verification in Computing

Security concerns for Large Language Models: A survey

Open access
Li, Miles Q., Fung, Benjamin C.M.·2025·Journal of Information Security and Applications

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jisa.2025.104284

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Categories like 'Physical Harm' are easily intercepted, while subtle threats such as 'Sensitive Data Leakage' and 'Sophisticated Misinformation' often bypass the semantic filters.

    “Our granular analysis by risk category showed that whereas categories like”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, M. Q., & Fung, B. C. M.
Affiliations
McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Li, Miles Q.
Venue
Journal of Information Security and Applications
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-12
Volume
95
Pages
104284
ISSN
2214-2126 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4415478691
Cited by
26
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 6
FWCI
10.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Information Security and Applications (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Canada Research Chairs Program (CRC-2019-00041)
  • NSERC (RGPIN-2024-04087, CREATE-554764-2021)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
Keywords
large language models, LLM security, prompt manipulation, autonomous LLM agents, security defenses, ChatGPT

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review