REVIEW 1 cited by
TF-Attack: Transferable and Fast Adversarial Attacks on 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
read the original abstract
With the great advancements in large language models (LLMs), adversarial attacks against LLMs have recently attracted increasing attention. We found that pre-existing adversarial attack methodologies exhibit limited transferability and are notably inefficient, particularly when applied to LLMs. In this paper, we analyze the core mechanisms of previous predominant adversarial attack methods, revealing that 1) the distributions of importance score differ markedly among victim models, restricting the transferability; 2) the sequential attack processes induces substantial time overheads. Based on the above two insights, we introduce a new scheme, named TF-Attack, for Transferable and Fast adversarial attacks on LLMs. TF-Attack employs an external LLM as a third-party overseer rather than the victim model to identify critical units within sentences. Moreover, TF-Attack introduces the concept of Importance Level, which allows for parallel substitutions of attacks. We conduct extensive experiments on 6 widely adopted benchmarks, evaluating the proposed method through both automatic and human metrics. Results show that our method consistently surpasses previous methods in transferability and delivers significant speed improvements, up to 20 times faster than earlier attack strategies.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
On the Validity of Traditional Vulnerability Scoring Systems for Adversarial Attacks against LLMs
Applying CVSS, DREAD, OWASP, and SSVC to 56 adversarial LLM attacks via three LLM judges yields near-constant factor scores, which the authors take as evidence that these metrics cannot differentiate LLM attacks.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.