mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Mapping LLM Security Landscapes: A Comprehensive Stakeholder Risk Assessment Proposal

arXiv 2403.13309 ↗First posted 20 Mar 2024cs.CR cs.AIcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) across diverse sectors has marked a transformative era, showcasing remarkable capabilities in text generation and problem-solving tasks. However, this technological advancement is accompanied by significant risks and vulnerabilities. Despite ongoing security enhancements, attackers persistently exploit these weaknesses, casting doubts on the overall trustworthiness of LLMs. Compounding the issue, organisations are deploying LLM-integrated systems without understanding the severity of potential consequences. Existing studies by OWASP and MITRE offer a general overview of threats and vulnerabilities but lack a method for directly and succinctly analysing the risks for security practitioners, developers, and key decision-makers who are working with this novel technology. To address this gap, we propose a risk assessment process using tools like the OWASP risk rating methodology which is used for traditional systems. We conduct scenario analysis to identify potential threat agents and map the dependent system components against vulnerability factors. Through this analysis, we assess the likelihood of a cyberattack. Subsequently, we conduct a thorough impact analysis to derive a comprehensive threat matrix. We also map threats against three key stakeholder groups: developers engaged in model fine-tuning, application developers utilizing third-party APIs, and end users. The proposed threat matrix provides a holistic evaluation of LLM-related risks, enabling stakeholders to make informed decisions for effective mitigation strategies. Our outlined process serves as an actionable and comprehensive tool for security practitioners, offering insights for resource management and enhancing the overall system security.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2024.

Builds on

15 of 34 references.

References · 15

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  3. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  4. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  5. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  6. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  7. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  8. 2023Siren's Song in the AI Ocean: A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Modelscited by 698
  9. 2023Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 639
  10. 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
  11. 2023Multi-step Jailbreaking Privacy Attacks on ChatGPTcited by 333
  12. 2023Fundamental Limitations of Alignment in Large Language Modelscited by 155
3 more
  1. 2023Instructions as Backdoors: Backdoor Vulnerabilities of Instruction Tuning for Large Language Modelscited by 110
  2. 2024Risk Taxonomy, Mitigation, and Assessment Benchmarks of Large Language Model Systemscited by 66
  3. 2024On the Societal Impact of Open Foundation Modelscited by 65

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

9 papers.