Frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) pose unprecedented dual-use risks through the potential proliferation of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons knowledge. We present the first comprehensive evaluation of 10 leading commercial LLMs against both a novel 200-prompt CBRN dataset and a 180-prompt subset of the FORTRESS benchmark, using a rigorous three-tier attack methodology. Our findings expose critical safety vulnerabilities: Deep Inception attacks achieve 86.0\% success versus 33.8\% for direct requests, demonstrating superficial filtering mechanisms; Model safety performance varies dramatically from 2\% (claude-opus-4) to 96\% (mistral-small-latest) attack success rates; and eight models exceed 70\% vulnerability when asked to enhance dangerous material properties. We identify fundamental brittleness in current safety alignment, where simple prompt engineering techniques bypass safeguards for dangerous CBRN information. These results challenge industry safety claims and highlight urgent needs for standardized evaluation frameworks, transparent safety metrics, and more robust alignment techniques to mitigate catastrophic misuse risks while preserving beneficial capabilities.

Large Language Diffusion Models (LLDMs) exhibit comparable performance to LLMs while offering distinct advantages in inference speed and mathematical reasoning tasks.The precise and rapid generation capabilities of LLDMs amplify concerns of harmful generations, while existing jailbreak methodologies designed for Large Language Models (LLMs) prove limited effectiveness against LLDMs and fail to expose safety vulnerabilities.Successful defense cannot definitively resolve harmful generation concerns, as it remains unclear whether LLDMs possess safety robustness or existing attacks are incompatible with diffusion-based architectures.To address this, we first reveal the vulnerability of LLDMs to jailbreak and demonstrate that attack failure in LLDMs stems from fundamental architectural differences.We present a PArallel Decoding jailbreak (PAD) for diffusion-based language models. PAD introduces Multi-Point Attention Attack, which guides parallel generative processes toward harmful outputs that inspired by affirmative response patterns in LLMs. Experimental evaluations across four LLDMs demonstrate that PAD achieves jailbreak attack success rates by 97%, revealing significant safety vulnerabilities. Furthermore, compared to autoregressive LLMs of the same size, LLDMs increase the harmful generation speed by 2x, significantly highlighting risks of uncontrolled misuse.Through comprehensive analysis, we provide an investigation into LLDM architecture, offering critical insights for the secure deployment of diffusion-based language models.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been demonstrated to generate illegal or unethical responses, particularly when subjected to "jailbreak." Research on jailbreak has highlighted the safety issues of LLMs. However, prior studies have predominantly focused on single-turn dialogue, ignoring the potential complexities and risks presented by multi-turn dialogue, a crucial mode through which humans derive information from LLMs. In this paper, we argue that humans could exploit multi-turn dialogue to induce LLMs into generating harmful information. LLMs may not intend to reject cautionary or borderline unsafe queries, even if each turn is closely served for one malicious purpose in a multi-turn dialogue. Therefore, by decomposing an unsafe query into several sub-queries for multi-turn dialogue, we induced LLMs to answer harmful sub-questions incrementally, culminating in an overall harmful response. Our experiments, conducted across a wide range of LLMs, indicate current inadequacies in the safety mechanisms of LLMs in multi-turn dialogue. Our findings expose vulnerabilities of LLMs in complex scenarios involving multi-turn dialogue, presenting new challenges for the safety of LLMs.