Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attacks Through Goal Prioritization

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 2311.09096 v2 pith:5YIQT3TA submitted 2023-11-15 cs.CL

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

While significant attention has been dedicated to exploiting weaknesses in LLMs through jailbreaking attacks, there remains a paucity of effort in defending against these attacks. We point out a pivotal factor contributing to the success of jailbreaks: the intrinsic conflict between the goals of being helpful and ensuring safety. Accordingly, we propose to integrate goal prioritization at both training and inference stages to counteract. Implementing goal prioritization during inference substantially diminishes the Attack Success Rate (ASR) of jailbreaking from 66.4% to 3.6% for ChatGPT. And integrating goal prioritization into model training reduces the ASR from 71.0% to 6.6% for Llama2-13B. Remarkably, even in scenarios where no jailbreaking samples are included during training, our approach slashes the ASR by half. Additionally, our findings reveal that while stronger LLMs face greater safety risks, they also possess a greater capacity to be steered towards defending against such attacks, both because of their stronger ability in instruction following. Our work thus contributes to the comprehension of jailbreaking attacks and defenses, and sheds light on the relationship between LLMs' capability and safety. Our code is available at \url{https://github.com/thu-coai/JailbreakDefense_GoalPriority}.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Towards an AI co-scientist

    cs.AI 2025-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multi-agent AI system generates novel biomedical hypotheses that show promising experimental validation in drug repurposing for leukemia, new targets for liver fibrosis, and a bacterial gene transfer mechanism.

  2. GUARD: Guideline Upholding Test through Adaptive Role-play and Jailbreak Diagnostics for LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    GUARD automates generation of guideline-violating questions and jailbreak diagnostics to test LLM compliance with government ethics guidelines, validated empirically on eight models and extended to vision-language models.

  3. A Real-Time, Self-Tuning Moderator Framework for Adversarial Prompt Detection

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    RTST, a two-agent moderator with an explainable Behavior ledger and per-prompt weight updates, reduced attack success rate from 12-63% to 0-17% on three jailbreak benchmarks with Gemini 2.5 Flash.

Pith tools