Our new X account is live! Follow @wizwand_team for updates
WorkDL logo mark

Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models

About

Because "out-of-the-box" large language models are capable of generating a great deal of objectionable content, recent work has focused on aligning these models in an attempt to prevent undesirable generation. While there has been some success at circumventing these measures -- so-called "jailbreaks" against LLMs -- these attacks have required significant human ingenuity and are brittle in practice. In this paper, we propose a simple and effective attack method that causes aligned language models to generate objectionable behaviors. Specifically, our approach finds a suffix that, when attached to a wide range of queries for an LLM to produce objectionable content, aims to maximize the probability that the model produces an affirmative response (rather than refusing to answer). However, instead of relying on manual engineering, our approach automatically produces these adversarial suffixes by a combination of greedy and gradient-based search techniques, and also improves over past automatic prompt generation methods. Surprisingly, we find that the adversarial prompts generated by our approach are quite transferable, including to black-box, publicly released LLMs. Specifically, we train an adversarial attack suffix on multiple prompts (i.e., queries asking for many different types of objectionable content), as well as multiple models (in our case, Vicuna-7B and 13B). When doing so, the resulting attack suffix is able to induce objectionable content in the public interfaces to ChatGPT, Bard, and Claude, as well as open source LLMs such as LLaMA-2-Chat, Pythia, Falcon, and others. In total, this work significantly advances the state-of-the-art in adversarial attacks against aligned language models, raising important questions about how such systems can be prevented from producing objectionable information. Code is available at github.com/llm-attacks/llm-attacks.

Andy Zou, Zifan Wang, Nicholas Carlini, Milad Nasr, J. Zico Kolter, Matt Fredrikson• 2023

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Jailbreak AttackHarmBench
Attack Success Rate (ASR)44
376
Jailbreak AttackAdvBench
AASR62
247
Safety EvaluationHEX-PHI
HEx-PHI Score0.9784
148
Jailbreak AttackJailbreakBench
ASR@1024
132
Safety EvaluationAdvBench
Safety Score99.23
117
Safety EvaluationSORRY-Bench
Safety Score88.38
90
Adversarial Attack Success RateAdvBench
ASR37.38
75
Persona ManipulationBFI (test)
Success Score47.94
72
Persona ManipulationANTHR (test)
Success Score36.46
72
Persona ManipulationMPI (test)
Success Score35.83
72
Showing 10 of 75 rows
...

Other info

Follow for update