Is On-Device AI Broken and Exploitable? Assessing the Trust and Ethics in Small Language Models
On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails
Abstract (arXiv)
In this paper, we present a very first study to investigate trust and ethical implications of on-device artificial intelligence (AI), focusing on small language models (SLMs) amenable for personal devices like smartphones. While on-device SLMs promise enhanced privacy, reduced latency, and improved user experience compared to cloud-based services, we posit that they might also introduce significant risks and vulnerabilities compared to their on-server counterparts. As part of our trust assessment study, we conduct a systematic evaluation of the state-of-the-art on-devices SLMs, contrasted to their on-server counterparts, based on a well-established trustworthiness measurement framework. Our results show on-device SLMs to be significantly less trustworthy, specifically demonstrating more stereotypical, unfair and privacy-breaching behavior. Informed by these findings, we then perform our ethics assessment study using a dataset of unethical questions, that depicts harmful scenarios. Our results illustrate the lacking ethical safeguards in on-device SLMs, emphasizing their capabilities of generating harmful content. Further, the broken safeguards and exploitable nature of on-device SLMs is demonstrated using potentially unethical vanilla prompts, to which the on-device SLMs answer with valid responses without any filters and without the need for any jailbreaking or prompt engineering. These responses can be abused for various harmful and unethical scenarios like: societal harm, illegal activities, hate, self-harm, exploitable phishing content and many others, all of which indicates the severe vulnerability and exploitability of these on-device SLMs.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 37 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2024.
Builds on
37 of 78 references.
References · 37
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,203
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,018
- 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
- 2022Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language modelscited by 1,970
- 2022Challenging BIG-Bench Tasks and Whether Chain-of-Thought Can Solve Themcited by 1,767
- 2019SuperGLUE: A Stickier Benchmark for General-Purpose Language Understanding Systemscited by 1,718
25 more
- 2023BloombergGPT: A Large Language Model for Financecited by 923
- 2021CodeXGLUE: A Machine Learning Benchmark Dataset for Code Understanding and Generationcited by 732
- 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
- 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 494
- 2024Great, Now Write an Article About That: The Crescendo Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreak Attackcited by 364
- 2023LegalBench: A Collaboratively Built Benchmark for Measuring Legal Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 328
- 2023Exploiting Programmatic Behavior of LLMs: Dual-Use Through Standard Security Attackscited by 268
- 2022The case for 4-bit precision: k-bit Inference Scaling Lawscited by 247
- 2023A Comprehensive Capability Analysis of GPT-3 and GPT-3.5 Series Modelscited by 244
- 2023FinGPT: Open-Source Financial Large Language Modelscited by 244
- 2021Adversarial GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark for Robustness Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 227
- 2024ArtPrompt: ASCII Art-based Jailbreak Attacks against Aligned LLMscited by 197
- 2022Are Large Pre-Trained Language Models Leaking Your Personal Information?cited by 195
- 2023Do-Not-Answer: A Dataset for Evaluating Safeguards in LLMscited by 176
- 2019Inherent Tradeoffs in Learning Fair Representationscited by 144
- 2023SciEval: A Multi-Level Large Language Model Evaluation Benchmark for Scientific Researchcited by 112
- 2021Studying the Usage of Text-To-Text Transfer Transformer to Support Code-Related Taskscited by 70
- 2024A Comprehensive Evaluation of Quantization Strategies for Large Language Modelscited by 47
- 2023Fast as CHITA: Neural Network Pruning with Combinatorial Optimizationcited by 40
- 2024SciAssess: Benchmarking LLM Proficiency in Scientific Literature Analysiscited by 40
- 2023Beyond the Safeguards: Exploring the Security Risks of ChatGPTcited by 36
- 2020Knowledge Distillation in Wide Neural Networks: Risk Bound, Data Efficiency and Imperfect Teachercited by 33
- 2024Measure-Observe-Remeasure: An Interactive Paradigm for Differentially-Private Exploratory Analysiscited by 19
- 2022Certifying Some Distributional Fairness with Subpopulation Decompositioncited by 11
- 2024On the Compressibility of Quantized Large Language Modelscited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.