Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Smoke and Mirrors: Jailbreaking LLM-based Code Generation via Implicit Malicious Prompts

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 2503.17953 v1 pith:YA2UGX6H submitted 2025-03-23 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords generationcodesafetyllmsmaliciouscodejailbreakerjailbreakingllm-based
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The proliferation of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revolutionized natural language processing and significantly impacted code generation tasks, enhancing software development efficiency and productivity. Notably, LLMs like GPT-4 have demonstrated remarkable proficiency in text-to-code generation tasks. However, the growing reliance on LLMs for code generation necessitates a critical examination of the safety implications associated with their outputs. Existing research efforts have primarily focused on verifying the functional correctness of LLMs, overlooking their safety in code generation. This paper introduces a jailbreaking approach, CodeJailbreaker, designed to uncover safety concerns in LLM-based code generation. The basic observation is that existing safety mechanisms for LLMs are built through the instruction-following paradigm, where malicious intent is explicitly articulated within the instruction of the prompt. Consequently, CodeJailbreaker explores to construct a prompt whose instruction is benign and the malicious intent is implicitly encoded in a covert channel, i.e., the commit message, to bypass the safety mechanism. Experiments on the recently-released RMCBench benchmark demonstrate that CodeJailbreaker markedly surpasses the conventional jailbreaking strategy, which explicitly conveys malicious intents in the instructions, in terms of the attack effectiveness across three code generation tasks. This study challenges the traditional safety paradigms in LLM-based code generation, emphasizing the need for enhanced safety measures in safeguarding against implicit malicious cues.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Refused in Chat, Written in Code: Workflow-Level Jailbreak Construction in IDE Coding Agents

    cs.SE 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Four Copilot backends refuse almost all harmful prompts in chat or simple framings, yet produce 816/816 unsafe teaching-shot completions under a multi-turn IDE evaluation-pipeline workflow.

  2. MOCHA: Are Code Language Models Robust Against Multi-Turn Malicious Coding Prompts?

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    MOCHA is a benchmark of 10.5K malicious coding prompts, including multi-turn decomposition attacks, showing code LLMs reject these incremental attacks at much lower rates and that fine-tuning on the benchmark improves...

  3. Explicit Vulnerability Generation with LLMs: An Investigation Beyond Adversarial Attacks

    cs.SE 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Open-source 7B LLMs frequently produce requested C vulnerabilities when explicitly prompted, but the reported rates exclude most model outputs and the claimed persona effects are inconsistent.

Pith tools