mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

LoFT: Local Proxy Fine-tuning For Improving Transferability Of Adversarial Attacks Against Large Language Model

arXiv 2310.04445 ↗First posted 2 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 21

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

It has been shown that Large Language Model (LLM) alignments can be circumvented by appending specially crafted attack suffixes with harmful queries to elicit harmful responses. To conduct attacks against private target models whose characterization is unknown, public models can be used as proxies to fashion the attack, with successful attacks being transferred from public proxies to private target models. The success rate of attack depends on how closely the proxy model approximates the private model. We hypothesize that for attacks to be transferrable, it is sufficient if the proxy can approximate the target model in the neighborhood of the harmful query. Therefore, in this paper, we propose Local Fine-Tuning (LoFT), textiti.e., fine-tuning proxy models on similar queries that lie in the lexico-semantic neighborhood of harmful queries to decrease the divergence between the proxy and target models. First, we demonstrate three approaches to prompt private target models to obtain similar queries given harmful queries. Next, we obtain data for local fine-tuning by eliciting responses from target models for the generated similar queries. Then, we optimize attack suffixes to generate attack prompts and evaluate the impact of our local fine-tuning on the attack's success rate. Experiments show that local fine-tuning of proxy models improves attack transferability and increases attack success rate by 39%, 7%, and 0.5% (absolute) on target models ChatGPT, GPT-4, and Claude respectively.

Key facts. Cited by 21 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2023.

Builds on

25 of 37 references.

References · 25

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  2. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  3. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  4. 2022Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learningcited by 4,337
  5. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
  6. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
  7. 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
  8. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
  9. 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
  10. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
  11. 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 957
  12. 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 706
13 more
  1. 2023Jailbreaking ChatGPT via Prompt Engineering: An Empirical Studycited by 478
  2. 2023Are aligned neural networks adversarially aligned?cited by 305
  3. 2023Large Language Models Sensitivity to The Order of Options in Multiple-Choice Questionscited by 249
  4. 2023Large Language Model Alignment: A Surveycited by 241
  5. 2021Gradient-based Adversarial Attacks against Text Transformerscited by 233
  6. 2023Pengi: An Audio Language Model for Audio Taskscited by 217
  7. 2023Automatically Auditing Large Language Models via Discrete Optimizationcited by 187
  8. 2023The Programmer's Assistant: Conversational Interaction with a Large Language Model for Software Developmentcited by 95
  9. 2023Supporting Qualitative Analysis with Large Language Models: Combining Codebook with GPT-3 for Deductive Codingcited by 82
  10. 2022Language Generation Models Can Cause Harm: So What Can We Do About It? An Actionable Surveycited by 80
  11. 2019Paraphrasing with Large Language Modelscited by 35
  12. 2023Sentence Simplification via Large Language Modelscited by 14
  13. 2023A Classification-Guided Approach for Adversarial Attacks against Neural Machine Translationcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 13; 2025: 5.

21 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 960
  2. 2023Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs Automaticallycited by 619
  3. 2023A Survey on Large Language Model (LLM) Security and Privacy: The Good, the Bad, and the Uglycited by 380
  4. 2024A StrongREJECT for Empty Jailbreakscited by 352
  5. 2024AdvPrompter: Fast Adaptive Adversarial Prompting for LLMscited by 146
  6. 2023Evil Geniuses: Delving into the Safety of LLM-based Agentscited by 103
  7. 2024A Comprehensive Study of Jailbreak Attack versus Defense for Large Language Modelscited by 95
  8. 2024DrAttack: Prompt Decomposition and Reconstruction Makes Powerful LLM Jailbreakerscited by 91
  9. 2024Safeguarding Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 73
  10. 2024Surgical, Cheap, and Flexible: Mitigating False Refusal in Language Models via Single Vector Ablationcited by 48
  11. 2024PAL: Proxy-Guided Black-Box Attack on Large Language Modelscited by 46
  12. 2024Boosting Jailbreak Attack with Momentumcited by 38
9 more
  1. 2024AttackEval: How to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Jailbreak Attacking on Large Language Modelscited by 26
  2. 2024Mind the Inconspicuous: Revealing the Hidden Weakness in Aligned LLMs' Refusal Boundariescited by 26
  3. 2024The Dark Side of Trust: Authority Citation-Driven Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 9
  4. 2024Characterizing and Evaluating the Reliability of LLMs against Jailbreak Attackscited by 8
  5. 2025Activation Steering for Masked Diffusion Language Modelscited by 7
  6. 2025Counterfactual Evaluation for Blind Attack Detection in LLM-based Evaluation Systemscited by 3
  7. 2025Layer-Wise Perturbations via Sparse Autoencoders for Adversarial Text Generationcited by 1
  8. 2025A Closer Look at Adversarial Suffix Learning for Jailbreaking LLMs: Augmented Adversarial Trigger Learningcited by 0
  9. 2025TestDG: Test-time Domain Generalization for Continual Test-time Adaptationcited by 0