Small language models (SLMs) have become increasingly prominent in the deployment on edge devices due to their high efficiency and low computational cost. While researchers continue to advance the capabilities of SLMs through innovative training strategies and model compression techniques, the security risks of SLMs have received considerably less attention compared to large language models (LLMs).To fill this gap, we provide a comprehensive empirical study to evaluate the security performance of 13 state-of-the-art SLMs under various jailbreak attacks. Our experiments demonstrate that most SLMs are quite susceptible to existing jailbreak attacks, while some of them are even vulnerable to direct harmful prompts.To address the safety concerns, we evaluate several representative defense methods and demonstrate their effectiveness in enhancing the security of SLMs. We further analyze the potential security degradation caused by different SLM techniques including architecture compression, quantization, knowledge distillation, and so on. We expect that our research can highlight the security challenges of SLMs and provide valuable insights to future work in developing more robust and secure SLMs.

Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative model training while preserving data privacy, but its decentralized nature exposes it to client-side data poisoning attacks (DPAs) and model poisoning attacks (MPAs) that degrade global model performance. While numerous proposed defenses claim substantial effectiveness, their evaluation is typically done in isolation with limited attack strategies, raising concerns about their validity. Additionally, existing studies overlook the mutual effectiveness of defenses against both DPAs and MPAs, causing fragmentation in this field. This paper aims to provide a unified benchmark and analysis of defenses against DPAs and MPAs, clarifying the distinction between these two similar but slightly distinct domains. We present a systematic taxonomy of poisoning attacks and defense strategies, outlining their design, strengths, and limitations. Then, a unified comparative evaluation across FL algorithms and data heterogeneity is conducted to validate their individual and mutual effectiveness and derive key insights for design principles and future research. Along with the analysis, we frame our work to a unified benchmark, FLPoison, with high modularity and scalability to evaluate 15 representative poisoning attacks and 17 defense strategies, facilitating future research in this domain. Code is available at https://github.com/vio1etus/FLPoison.

Backdoor attacks significantly compromise the security of large language models by triggering them to output specific and controlled content. Currently, triggers for textual backdoor attacks fall into two categories: fixed-token triggers and sentence-pattern triggers. However, the former are typically easy to identify and filter, while the latter, such as syntax and style, do not apply to all original samples and may lead to semantic shifts. In this paper, inspired by cross-lingual (CL) prompts of LLMs in real-world scenarios, we propose a higher-dimensional trigger method at the paragraph level, namely CL-attack. CL-attack injects the backdoor by using texts with specific structures that incorporate multiple languages, thereby offering greater stealthiness and universality compared to existing backdoor attack techniques. Extensive experiments on different tasks and model architectures demonstrate that CL-attack can achieve nearly 100% attack success rate with a low poisoning rate in both classification and generation tasks. We also empirically show that the CL-attack is more robust against current major defense methods compared to baseline backdoor attacks. Additionally, to mitigate CL-attack, we further develop a new defense called TranslateDefense, which can partially mitigate the impact of CL-attack.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have performed exceptionally in various text-generative tasks, including question answering, translation, code completion, etc. However, the over-assistance of LLMs has raised the challenge of "jailbreaking", which induces the model to generate malicious responses against the usage policy and society by designing adversarial prompts. With the emergence of jailbreak attack methods exploiting different vulnerabilities in LLMs, the corresponding safety alignment measures are also evolving. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive and detailed taxonomy of jailbreak attack and defense methods. For instance, the attack methods are divided into black-box and white-box attacks based on the transparency of the target model. Meanwhile, we classify defense methods into prompt-level and model-level defenses. Additionally, we further subdivide these attack and defense methods into distinct sub-classes and present a coherent diagram illustrating their relationships. We also conduct an investigation into the current evaluation methods and compare them from different perspectives. Our findings aim to inspire future research and practical implementations in safeguarding LLMs against adversarial attacks. Above all, although jailbreak remains a significant concern within the community, we believe that our work enhances the understanding of this domain and provides a foundation for developing more secure LLMs.

Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various applications, including text generation and complex tasks. However, the misuse of LLMs raises concerns about the authenticity and ethical implications of the content they produce, such as deepfake news, academic fraud, and copyright infringement. Watermarking techniques, which embed identifiable markers in machine-generated text, offer a promising solution to these issues by allowing for content verification and origin tracing. Unfortunately, the robustness of current LLM watermarking schemes under potential watermark removal attacks has not been comprehensively explored. In this paper, to fill this gap, we first systematically comb the mainstream watermarking schemes and removal attacks on machine-generated texts, and then we categorize them into pre-text (before text generation) and post-text (after text generation) classes so that we can conduct diversified analyses. In our experiments, we evaluate eight watermarks (five pre-text, three post-text) and twelve attacks (two pre-text, ten post-text) across 87 scenarios. Evaluation results indicate that (1) KGW and Exponential watermarks offer high text quality and watermark retention but remain vulnerable to most attacks; (2) Post-text attacks are found to be more efficient and practical than pre-text attacks; (3) Pre-text watermarks are generally more imperceptible, as they do not alter text fluency, unlike post-text watermarks; (4) Additionally, combined attack methods can significantly increase effectiveness, highlighting the need for more robust watermarking solutions. Our study underscores the vulnerabilities of current techniques and the necessity for developing more resilient schemes.

Jailbreak attacks aim to induce Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate harmful responses for forbidden instructions, presenting severe misuse threats to LLMs. Up to now, research into jailbreak attacks and defenses is emerging, however, there is (surprisingly) no consensus on how to evaluate whether a jailbreak attempt is successful. In other words, the methods to assess the harmfulness of an LLM's response are varied, such as manual annotation or prompting GPT-4 in specific ways. Each approach has its own set of strengths and weaknesses, impacting their alignment with human values, as well as the time and financial cost. This diversity in evaluation presents challenges for researchers in choosing suitable evaluation methods and conducting fair comparisons across different jailbreak attacks and defenses. In this paper, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of jailbreak evaluation methodologies, drawing from nearly ninety jailbreak research released between May 2023 and April 2024. Our study introduces a systematic taxonomy of jailbreak evaluators, offering in-depth insights into their strengths and weaknesses, along with the current status of their adaptation. Moreover, to facilitate subsequent research, we propose JailbreakEval, a user-friendly toolkit focusing on the evaluation of jailbreak attempts. It includes various well-known evaluators out-of-the-box, so that users can obtain evaluation results with only a single command. JailbreakEval also allows users to customize their own evaluation workflow in a unified framework with the ease of development and comparison. In summary, we regard JailbreakEval to be a catalyst that simplifies the evaluation process in jailbreak research and fosters an inclusive standard for jailbreak evaluation within the community.

Model merging is a promising lightweight model empowerment technique that does not rely on expensive computing devices (e.g., GPUs) or require the collection of specific training data. Instead, it involves editing different upstream model parameters to absorb their downstream task capabilities. However, uncertified model merging can infringe upon the Intellectual Property (IP) rights of the original upstream models. In this paper, we conduct the first study on the robustness of IP protection methods in model merging scenarios. We investigate two state-of-the-art IP protection techniques: Quantization Watermarking and Instructional Fingerprint, along with various advanced model merging technologies, such as Task Arithmetic, TIES-MERGING, and so on. Experimental results indicate that current Large Language Model (LLM) watermarking techniques cannot survive in the merged models, whereas model fingerprinting techniques can. Our research aims to highlight that model merging should be an indispensable consideration in the robustness assessment of model IP protection techniques, thereby promoting the healthy development of the open-source LLM community.

Ensuring the safety of artificial intelligence-generated content (AIGC) is a longstanding topic in the artificial intelligence (AI) community, and the safety concerns associated with Large Language Models (LLMs) have been widely investigated. Recently, large vision-language models (VLMs) represent an unprecedented revolution, as they are built upon LLMs but can incorporate additional modalities (e.g., images). However, the safety of VLMs lacks systematic evaluation, and there may be an overconfidence in the safety guarantees provided by their underlying LLMs. In this paper, to demonstrate that introducing additional modality modules leads to unforeseen AI safety issues, we propose FigStep, a straightforward yet effective jailbreaking algorithm against VLMs. Instead of feeding textual harmful instructions directly, FigStep converts the harmful content into images through typography to bypass the safety alignment within the textual module of the VLMs, inducing VLMs to output unsafe responses that violate common AI safety policies. In our evaluation, we manually review 46,500 model responses generated by 3 families of the promising open-source VLMs, i.e., LLaVA, MiniGPT4, and CogVLM (a total of 6 VLMs). The experimental results show that FigStep can achieve an average attack success rate of 82.50% on 500 harmful queries in 10 topics. Moreover, we demonstrate that the methodology of FigStep can even jailbreak GPT-4V, which already leverages an OCR detector to filter harmful queries. Above all, our work reveals that VLMs are vulnerable to jailbreaking attacks, which highlights the necessity of novel safety alignments between visual and textual modalities.