mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Prompt, Divide, and Conquer: Bypassing Large Language Model Safety Filters via Segmented and Distributed Prompt Processing

arXiv 2503.21598 ↗First posted 27 Mar 2025cs.CR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 5

On the map: LLM safety and security → Jailbreaking

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have transformed task automation and content generation across various domains while incorporating safety filters to prevent misuse. We introduce a novel jailbreaking framework that employs distributed prompt processing combined with iterative refinements to bypass these safety measures, particularly in generating malicious code. Our architecture consists of four key modules: prompt segmentation, parallel processing, response aggregation, and LLM-based jury evaluation. Tested on 500 malicious prompts across 10 cybersecurity categories, the framework achieves a 73.2% Success Rate (SR) in generating malicious code. Notably, our comparative analysis reveals that traditional single-LLM judge evaluation overestimates SRs (93.8%) compared to our LLM jury system (73.2%), with manual verification confirming that single-judge assessments often accept incomplete implementations. Moreover, we demonstrate that our distributed architecture improves SRs by 12% over the non-distributed approach in an ablation study, highlighting both the effectiveness of distributed prompt processing and the importance of robust evaluation methodologies in assessing jailbreak attempts.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Jailbreaking, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 21 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2025.

Builds on

21 of 44 references.

Closest ancestors · 7

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025CySecBench: Generative AI-based CyberSecurity-focused Prompt Dataset for Benchmarking Large Language Models2 Jan
  2. 2024WordGame: Efficient & Effective LLM Jailbreak via Simultaneous Obfuscation in Query and Response22 May
  3. 2024Great, Now Write an Article About That: The Crescendo Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreak Attack2 Apr
  4. 2024Making Them Ask and Answer: Jailbreaking Large Language Models in Few Queries via Disguise and Reconstruction28 Feb
  5. 2023A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Generalized Nested Jailbreak Prompts can Fool Large Language Models Easily14 Nov
  6. 2023AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Models3 Oct
  7. 2023Low-Resource Languages Jailbreak GPT-43 Oct

Other references · 14

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
  4. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  5. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  6. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  7. 2024A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generationcited by 646
  8. 2025Humanity's Last Examcited by 467
  9. 2023JudgeLM: Fine-tuned Large Language Models are Scalable Judgescited by 351
  10. 2024ArtPrompt: ASCII Art-based Jailbreak Attacks against Aligned LLMscited by 197
  11. 2023Benchmarking Cognitive Biases in Large Language Models as Evaluatorscited by 147
  12. 2023From ChatGPT to ThreatGPT: Impact of Generative AI in Cybersecurity and Privacycited by 137
2 more
  1. 2023LLM Censorship: A Machine Learning Challenge or a Computer Security Problem?cited by 47
  2. 2024User Centric Evaluation of Code Generation Toolscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

5 papers.