Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Emerging Security Challenges of Large Language Models

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

arxiv 2412.17614 v1 pith:VZSNWN6E submitted 2024-12-23 cs.CR cs.AI

classification cs.CRcs.AI
keywords llmssecuritymodelswhatgrouppotentialworkingacross
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved record adoption in a short period of time across many different sectors including high importance areas such as education [4] and healthcare [23]. LLMs are open-ended models trained on diverse data without being tailored for specific downstream tasks, enabling broad applicability across various domains. They are commonly used for text generation, but also widely used to assist with code generation [3], and even analysis of security information, as Microsoft Security Copilot demonstrates [18]. Traditional Machine Learning (ML) models are vulnerable to adversarial attacks [9]. So the concerns on the potential security implications of such wide scale adoption of LLMs have led to the creation of this working group on the security of LLMs. During the Dagstuhl seminar on "Network Attack Detection and Defense - AI-Powered Threats and Responses", the working group discussions focused on the vulnerability of LLMs to adversarial attacks, rather than their potential use in generating malware or enabling cyberattacks. Although we note the potential threat represented by the latter, the role of the LLMs in such uses is mostly as an accelerator for development, similar to what it is in benign use. To make the analysis more specific, the working group employed ChatGPT as a concrete example of an LLM and addressed the following points, which also form the structure of this report: 1. How do LLMs differ in vulnerabilities from traditional ML models? 2. What are the attack objectives in LLMs? 3. How complex it is to assess the risks posed by the vulnerabilities of LLMs? 4. What is the supply chain in LLMs, how data flow in and out of systems and what are the security implications? We conclude with an overview of open challenges and outlook.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The State of Multilingual LLM Safety Research: From Measuring the Language Gap to Mitigating It

    cs.CL 2025-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM safety research at ACL venues from 2020 to 2024 is predominantly English-only, and the language gap is growing over time.

  2. Security Concerns for Large Language Models: A Survey

    cs.CR 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A survey that classifies LLM security threats and argues that intrinsic agentic risks, such as scheming, are underappreciated and poorly defended.

Pith tools