REVIEW 6 cited by
SecurityLingua: Efficient Defense of LLM Jailbreak Attacks via Security-Aware Prompt Compression
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
SecurityLingua: Efficient Defense of LLM Jailbreak Attacks via Security-Aware Prompt Compression
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved widespread adoption across numerous applications. However, many LLMs are vulnerable to malicious attacks even after safety alignment. These attacks typically bypass LLMs' safety guardrails by wrapping the original malicious instructions inside adversarial jailbreaks prompts. Previous research has proposed methods such as adversarial training and prompt rephrasing to mitigate these safety vulnerabilities, but these methods often reduce the utility of LLMs or lead to significant computational overhead and online latency. In this paper, we propose SecurityLingua, an effective and efficient approach to defend LLMs against jailbreak attacks via security-oriented prompt compression. Specifically, we train a prompt compressor designed to discern the "true intention" of the input prompt, with a particular focus on detecting the malicious intentions of adversarial prompts. Then, in addition to the original prompt, the intention is passed via the system prompt to the target LLM to help it identify the true intention of the request. SecurityLingua ensures a consistent user experience by leaving the original input prompt intact while revealing the user's potentially malicious intention and stimulating the built-in safety guardrails of the LLM. Moreover, thanks to prompt compression, SecurityLingua incurs only a negligible overhead and extra token cost compared to all existing defense methods, making it an especially practical solution for LLM defense. Experimental results demonstrate that SecurityLingua can effectively defend against malicious attacks and maintain utility of the LLM with negligible compute and latency overhead. Our code is available at https://aka.ms/SecurityLingua.
Forward citations
Cited by 6 Pith papers
-
Dictionary-Aligned Concept Control for Safeguarding Multimodal LLMs
DACO curates a 15,000-concept dictionary from 400K image-caption pairs and uses it to initialize an SAE that enables granular, concept-specific steering of MLLM activations, raising safety scores on MM-SafetyBench and...
-
CoopGuard: Stateful Cooperative Agents Safeguarding LLMs Against Evolving Multi-Round Attacks
CoopGuard deploys cooperative agents to track conversation history and counter evolving multi-round attacks on LLMs, achieving a 78.9% reduction in attack success rate on a new 5,200-sample benchmark.
-
Semantic Attacks on Tool-Augmented LLMs: Securing the Model Context Protocol Against Descriptor-Level Manipulation
Descriptor-level manipulation in the Model Context Protocol can drive LLMs to unsafe tool selections in up to 36% of cases; a layered defense of integrity checks, auxiliary-LLM vetting, and runtime guardrails reduces ...
-
Stateful Cooperative Agents Safeguarding LLMs Against Evolving Multi-Turn Attacks
CoopGuard's defer-tempt-analyze-coordinate agents cut reported jailbreak success and raise attacker token costs on the new EMRA benchmark, but the deceptive-rate metric is partly defined by the paper's own scoring rubric.
-
Prompt Governance? On Governing Technologies Governed by Natural Language
Literature on system prompts for AI shows fragmented and contradictory claims that complicate policy efforts to use them as reliable governance mechanisms.
-
Secure Multi-LLM Agentic AI and Agentification for Edge General Intelligence by Zero-Trust: A Survey
A survey proposing zero-trust architecture for multi-LLM systems in edge computing, with a taxonomy of model- and system-level defenses and a conceptual framework.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.