REVIEW 7 cited by
A Safe Harbor for AI Evaluation and Red Teaming
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
A Safe Harbor for AI Evaluation and Red Teaming
read the original abstract
Independent evaluation and red teaming are critical for identifying the risks posed by generative AI systems. However, the terms of service and enforcement strategies used by prominent AI companies to deter model misuse have disincentives on good faith safety evaluations. This causes some researchers to fear that conducting such research or releasing their findings will result in account suspensions or legal reprisal. Although some companies offer researcher access programs, they are an inadequate substitute for independent research access, as they have limited community representation, receive inadequate funding, and lack independence from corporate incentives. We propose that major AI developers commit to providing a legal and technical safe harbor, indemnifying public interest safety research and protecting it from the threat of account suspensions or legal reprisal. These proposals emerged from our collective experience conducting safety, privacy, and trustworthiness research on generative AI systems, where norms and incentives could be better aligned with public interests, without exacerbating model misuse. We believe these commitments are a necessary step towards more inclusive and unimpeded community efforts to tackle the risks of generative AI.
Forward citations
Cited by 7 Pith papers
-
ARMOR 2025: A Military-Aligned Benchmark for Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Beyond Civilian Contexts
ARMOR 2025 is a new benchmark with 519 doctrinally grounded prompts across a 12-category OODA-based taxonomy that reveals critical safety gaps in 21 commercial LLMs for military applications.
-
"Unlimited Realm of Exploration and Experimentation": Methods and Motivations of AI-Generated Sexual Content Creators
Interviews with 28 AIG-SC creators show motivations spanning sexual exploration, creative expression, technical experimentation, and occasional production of non-consensual intimate imagery.
-
When Search Goes Wrong: Red-Teaming Web-Augmented Large Language Models
CREST-Search is a red-teaming framework that crafts seemingly benign search queries to induce unsafe citations from web-augmented LLMs, backed by a new WebSearch-Harm dataset for fine-tuning a specialized attacker model.
-
Position: Preventing AI-Generated CSAM Necessitates New Approaches to AI Safety
Legal and ethical bans on CSAM access and generation break standard AI safety techniques, creating 15 open problems that demand new methods for dataset cleaning, concept fusion prevention, fine-tuning resilience, dete...
-
Open-World Evaluations for Measuring Frontier AI Capabilities
Open-world evaluations using qualitative review of real-world tasks can give earlier warnings of frontier AI capabilities than automated benchmarks, as demonstrated by an AI agent publishing a simple iOS app with one ...
-
JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Models
JailbreakBench supplies an evolving set of jailbreak prompts, a 100-behavior dataset aligned with usage policies, a standardized evaluation framework, and a leaderboard to enable comparable assessments of attacks and ...
-
SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attacks
SmoothLLM mitigates jailbreaking attacks on LLMs by randomly perturbing multiple copies of a prompt at the character level and aggregating the outputs to detect adversarial inputs.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.