REVIEW 2 cited by
Immunization against harmful fine-tuning attacks
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are often trained with safety guards intended to prevent harmful text generation. However, such safety training can be removed by fine-tuning the LLM on harmful datasets. While this emerging threat (harmful fine-tuning attacks) has been characterized by previous work, there is little understanding of how we should proceed in constructing and validating defenses against these attacks especially in the case where defenders would not have control of the fine-tuning process. We introduce a formal framework based on the training budget of an attacker which we call "Immunization" conditions. Using a formal characterisation of the harmful fine-tuning problem, we provide a thorough description of what a successful defense must comprise of and establish a set of guidelines on how rigorous defense research that gives us confidence should proceed.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Vulnerability-Aware Alignment: Mitigating Uneven Forgetting in Harmful Fine-Tuning
Vulnerability-Aware Alignment splits safety training data into fragile and robust groups, then uses group robust optimization and adversarial perturbations, cutting harmful response rates after harmful fine-tuning by ...
-
SafeTuneBed: A Toolkit for Benchmarking LLM Safety Alignment in Fine-Tuning
SafeTuneBed is a plugin-based benchmark and toolkit that standardizes the data, defenses, and metrics used to evaluate how well LLM fine-tuning preserves safety alignment.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.