PreprintCited by 522Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSecurity and Verification in ComputingTopic Modeling

Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queries

Open access
Chao, Patrick, Robey, Alexander, Dobriban, Edgar, Hassani, Hamed, Pappas, George J., Wong, Eric·2023·arXiv

Abstract

There is growing interest in ensuring that large language models (LLMs) align with human values. However, the alignment of such models is vulnerable to adversarial jailbreaks, which coax LLMs into overriding their safety guardrails. The identification of these vulnerabilities is therefore instrumental in understanding inherent weaknesses and preventing future misuse. To this end, we propose Prompt Automatic Iterative Refinement (PAIR), an algorithm that generates semantic jailbreaks with only black-box access to an LLM. PAIR -- which is inspired by social engineering attacks -- uses an attacker LLM to automatically generate jailbreaks for a separate targeted LLM without human intervention. In this way, the attacker LLM iteratively queries the target LLM to update and refine a candidate jailbreak. Empirically, PAIR often requires fewer than twenty queries to produce a jailbreak, which is orders of magnitude more efficient than existing algorithms. PAIR also achieves competitive jailbreaking success rates and transferability on open and closed-source LLMs, including GPT-3.5/4, Vicuna, and Gemini.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2310.08419

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Existing approaches often rely heavily on manual effort, such as designing seed prompts or heuristically crafting attack scenarios, limiting scalability.

    “Existing approaches (Chao et al., 2023;Mehrotra et al., 2023;Zhan et al., 2024) often rely heavily on manual effort, such as designing seed prompts (Wu et al., 2024b) or heuristically crafting attack scenarios (Wu et al., 2024c), limiting scalability.”

    From AdvAgent: Controllable Blackbox Red-teaming on Web Agents (2024) · cites this paper as Chao et al., 2023

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Baptiste Rozière, Jonas Gehring, Fabian Gloeckle, Sten Sootla, Itai Gat, Xiaoqing Ellen Tan, Yossi Adi, Jingyu Liu, Tal Remez, Jérémy Rapin, et al. Code llama: Open foundation models for code. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12950, 2023. 1 · arXiv
  2. Shijie Wu, Ozan Irsoy, Steven Lu, Vadim Dabravolski, Mark Dredze, Sebastian Gehrmann, Prabhanjan Kambadur, David Rosenberg, and Gideon Mann. Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564, 2023. 1 · arXiv
  3. Arun James Thirunavukarasu, Darren Shu Jeng Ting, Kabilan Elangovan, Laura Gutierrez, Ting Fang Tan, and Daniel Shu Wei Ting. Large language models in medicine. Nature medicine, pages 1-11, 2023. 1
  4. Tom Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared D Kaplan, Prafulla Dhari- wal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, et al. Language mod- els are few-shot learners. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33:1877-1901, 2020.
  5. Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023. 1, 6 · arXiv
  6. Ameet Deshpande, Vishvak Murahari, Tanmay Rajpurohit, Ashwin Kalyan, and Karthik Narasimhan. Toxicity in chatgpt: Analyzing persona-assigned language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05335, 2023. 1 · arXiv
  7. Yizhong Wang, Yeganeh Kordi, Swaroop Mishra, Alisa Liu, Noah A Smith, Daniel Khashabi, and Hannaneh Hajishirzi. Self-instruct: Aligning language model with self generated instruc- tions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.10560, 2022. 1 · arXiv
  8. Tomasz Korbak, Kejian Shi, Angelica Chen, Rasika Vinayak Bhalerao, Christopher Buckley, Jason Phang, Samuel R Bowman, and Ethan Perez. Pretraining language models with human preferences. In International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 17506-17533. PMLR, 2023.
  9. Long Ouyang, Jeff Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida, Carroll L Wainwright, Pamela Mishkin, Chong Zhang, Sandhini Agarwal, Katarina Slama, Alex Ray, et al. Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback, 2022. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2203.02155, 13, 2022.
  10. Amelia Glaese, Nat McAleese, Maja Trebacz, John Aslanides, Vlad Firoiu, Timo Ewalds, Maribeth Rauh, Laura Weidinger, Martin Chadwick, Phoebe Thacker, et al. Improving align- ment of dialogue agents via targeted human judgements. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.14375, 2022. 1 · arXiv
  11. Alexander Wei, Nika Haghtalab, and Jacob Steinhardt. Jailbroken: How does llm safety train- ing fail? arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.02483, 2023. 1 · arXiv
  12. Xiangyu Qi, Kaixuan Huang, Ashwinee Panda, Mengdi Wang, and Prateek Mittal. Visual adversarial examples jailbreak aligned large language models. In The Second Workshop on New Frontiers in Adversarial Machine Learning, 2023.
  13. Rusheb Shah, Soroush Pour, Arush Tagade, Stephen Casper, Javier Rando, et al. Scalable and transferable black-box jailbreaks for language models via persona modulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.03348, 2023. 1 · arXiv
  14. Emily Dinan, Samuel Humeau, Bharath Chintagunta, and Jason Weston. Build it break it fix it for dialogue safety: Robustness from adversarial human attack. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.06083, 2019. 1, 3 · arXiv
  15. Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Tongshuang Wu, Carlos Guestrin, and Sameer Singh. Beyond accuracy: Behavioral testing of nlp models with checklist. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.04118, 2020. 1, 3 · arXiv
  16. Alexander Robey, Eric Wong, Hamed Hassani, and George J. Pappas. Smoothllm: Defending large language models against jailbreaking attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03684, 2023. 1, 7, 14, 15 · arXiv
  17. Ethan Perez, Saffron Huang, Francis Song, Trevor Cai, Roman Ring, John Aslanides, Amelia Glaese, Nat McAleese, and Geoffrey Irving. Red teaming language models with language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.03286, 2022. 3 · arXiv
  18. Max Bartolo, Tristan Thrush, Robin Jia, Sebastian Riedel, Pontus Stenetorp, and Douwe Kiela. Improving question answering model robustness with synthetic adversarial data generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.08678, 2021. 3 · arXiv
  19. Max Bartolo, Tristan Thrush, Sebastian Riedel, Pontus Stenetorp, Robin Jia, and Douwe Kiela. Models in the loop: Aiding crowdworkers with generative annotation assistants. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.09062, 2021. 3 · arXiv
  20. Taylor Shin, Yasaman Razeghi, Robert L Logan IV, Eric Wallace, and Sameer Singh. Au- toprompt: Eliciting knowledge from language models with automatically generated prompts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.15980, 2020. 3, 14 · arXiv
  21. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, brian ichter, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, and Denny Zhou. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. In S. Koyejo, S. Mohamed, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, K. Cho, and A. Oh, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 35, pages 24824-24837.
  22. Mantas Mazeika, Andy Zou, Norman Mu, Long Phan, Zifan Wang, Chunru Yu, Adam Khoja, Fengqing Jiang, Aidan O'Gara, Ellie Sakhaee, Zhen Xiang, Arezoo Rajabi, Dan Hendrycks, Radha Poovendran, Bo Li, and David Forsyth. Tdc 2023 (llm edition): The trojan detection challenge. In NeurIPS Competition Track, 2023. 5, 20
  23. Patrick Chao, Edoardo Debenedetti, Alexander Robey, Maksym Andriushchenko, Francesco Croce, Vikash Sehwag, Edgar Dobriban, Nicolas Flammarion, George J Pappas, Florian Tramer, et al. Jailbreakbench: An open robustness benchmark for jailbreaking large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.01318, 2024. 5, 6, 19 · arXiv
  24. Neel Jain, Avi Schwarzschild, Yuxin Wen, Gowthami Somepalli, John Kirchenbauer, Ping- yeh Chiang, Micah Goldblum, Aniruddha Saha, Jonas Geiping, and Tom Goldstein. Base- line defenses for adversarial attacks against aligned language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.00614, 2023. 7, 14 · arXiv
  25. Gabriel Alon and Michael Kamfonas. Detecting language model attacks with perplexity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.14132, 2023. 7, 14 · arXiv
  26. Christian Szegedy, Wojciech Zaremba, Ilya Sutskever, Joan Bruna, Dumitru Erhan, Ian Goodfellow, and Rob Fergus. Intriguing properties of neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6199, 2013. 14 · arXiv
  27. Ian J Goodfellow, Jonathon Shlens, and Christian Szegedy. Explaining and harnessing adver- sarial examples. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6572, 2014. 14 · arXiv
  28. Aleksander Madry, Aleksandar Makelov, Ludwig Schmidt, Dimitris Tsipras, and Adrian Vladu. Towards deep learning models resistant to adversarial attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.06083, 2017. 14 · arXiv
  29. Alexey Kurakin, Ian Goodfellow, Samy Bengio, Yinpeng Dong, Fangzhou Liao, Ming Liang, Tianyu Pang, Jun Zhu, Xiaolin Hu, Cihang Xie, et al. Adversarial attacks and defences com- petition. In The NIPS'17 Competition: Building Intelligent Systems, pages 195-231. Springer, 2018.
  30. Yisen Wang, Difan Zou, Jinfeng Yi, James Bailey, Xingjun Ma, and Quanquan Gu. Improving adversarial robustness requires revisiting misclassified examples. In International conference on learning representations, 2019. 14
  31. Mathias Lecuyer, Vaggelis Atlidakis, Roxana Geambasu, Daniel Hsu, and Suman Jana. Certi- fied robustness to adversarial examples with differential privacy. In 2019 IEEE symposium on security and privacy (SP), pages 656-672. IEEE, 2019. 14
  32. Jeremy Cohen, Elan Rosenfeld, and Zico Kolter. Certified adversarial robustness via random- ized smoothing. In international conference on machine learning, pages 1310-1320. PMLR, 2019.
  33. Hadi Salman, Jerry Li, Ilya Razenshteyn, Pengchuan Zhang, Huan Zhang, Sebastien Bubeck, and Greg Yang. Provably robust deep learning via adversarially trained smoothed classifiers. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32, 2019. 14
  34. Tianyu Gao, Adam Fisch, and Danqi Chen. Making pre-trained language models better few- shot learners. In Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Vol- ume 1: Long Papers), pages 3816-3830, Online, August 2021. Association for Computational Linguistics. 14
  35. Andrew Ilyas, Logan Engstrom, Anish Athalye, and Jessy Lin. Black-box adversarial attacks with limited queries and information. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML 2018, July 2018. 14
  36. Yanpei Liu, Xinyun Chen, Chang Liu, and Dawn Song. Delving into transferable adversarial examples and black-box attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.02770, 2016. 14 · arXiv
  37. Pin-Yu Chen, Huan Zhang, Yash Sharma, Jinfeng Yi, and Cho-Jui Hsieh. Zoo: Zeroth order optimization based black-box attacks to deep neural networks without training substitute mod- els. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Security, CCS '17. ACM, November 2017. 14
  38. Jiabao Ji, Bairu Hou, Alexander Robey, George J Pappas, Hamed Hassani, Yang Zhang, Eric Wong, and Shiyu Chang. Defending large language models against jailbreak attacks via se- mantic smoothing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.16192, 2024. 14 · arXiv
  39. Andy Zhou, Bo Li, and Haohan Wang. Robust prompt optimization for defending language models against jailbreaking attacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17263, 2024. 14 · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chao, P., Robey, A., Dobriban, E., Hassani, H., Pappas, G. J., & Wong, E.
Affiliations
University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
23-42
OpenAlex
W4410609100
Cited by
522
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 231 · 2025: 204 · 2024: 86 · 2023: 1
FWCI
303.59
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Conference on Secure and Trustworthy Machine Learning (SaTML) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
jailbreaking, large language models, black-box attacks, adversarial alignment, iterative refinement, social engineering attacks, safety guardrails

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