Enze Wang

Zhenhua Wang, Wei Xie, Kai Chen et al.

Large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, have emerged with astonishing capabilities approaching artificial general intelligence. While providing convenience for various societal needs, LLMs have also lowered the cost of generating harmful content. Consequently, LLM developers have deployed semantic-level defenses to recognize and reject prompts that may lead to inappropriate content. Unfortunately, these defenses are not foolproof, and some attackers have crafted "jailbreak" prompts that temporarily hypnotize the LLM into forgetting content defense rules and answering any improper questions. To date, there is no clear explanation of the principles behind these semantic-level attacks and defenses in both industry and academia. This paper investigates the LLM jailbreak problem and proposes an automatic jailbreak method for the first time. We propose the concept of a semantic firewall and provide three technical implementation approaches. Inspired by the attack that penetrates traditional firewalls through reverse tunnels, we introduce a "self-deception" attack that can bypass the semantic firewall by inducing LLM to generate prompts that facilitate jailbreak. We generated a total of 2,520 attack payloads in six languages (English, Russian, French, Spanish, Chinese, and Arabic) across seven virtual scenarios, targeting the three most common types of violations: violence, hate, and pornography. The experiment was conducted on two models, namely the GPT-3.5-Turbo and GPT-4. The success rates on the two models were 86.2% and 67%, while the failure rates were 4.7% and 2.2%, respectively. This highlighted the effectiveness of the proposed attack method. All experimental code and raw data will be released as open-source to inspire future research. We believe that manipulating AI behavior through carefully crafted prompts will become an important research direction in the future.

Qianhong Guo, Wei Xie, Xiaofang Cai et al.

Although large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable capabilities across various tasks, evaluating their capabilities remains a challenging task. Existing evaluation methods suffer from issues such as data contamination, black-box operation, and subjective preference. These issues make it difficult to evaluate the LLMs' true capabilities comprehensively. To tackle these challenges, we propose a novel benchmark-free evaluation paradigm, LLM-Crowdsourced. It utilizes LLMs to generate questions, answer independently, and evaluate mutually. This method integrates four key evaluation criteria: dynamic, transparent, objective, and professional, which existing evaluation methods cannot satisfy simultaneously. Experiments on eight mainstream LLMs across mathematics and programming verify the advantages of our method in distinguishing LLM performance. Furthermore, our study reveals several novel findings that are difficult for traditional methods to detect, including but not limited to: (1) Gemini demonstrates the highest original and professional question-design capabilities among others; (2) Some LLMs exhibit ''memorization-based answering'' by misrecognizing questions as familiar ones with a similar structure; (3) LLM evaluation results demonstrate high consistency (robustness).