# Evaluating Multi-Agent Defences Against Jailbreaking Attacks on Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.23576 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.23576/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 10 of its 15 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2025.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Agent threats, guardrails and governance](https://mlsanity.com/agents/agent-threats-guardrails-and-governance/)
- LLM safety and security / [Jailbreaking](https://mlsanity.com/safety/jailbreaking/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 10 of 10)

- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02483/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model based Multi-Agents: A Survey of Progress and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01680/) (2024)
- [AutoDefense: Multi-Agent LLM Defense against Jailbreak Attacks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04783/) (2024)
- [How Alignment and Jailbreak Work: Explain LLM Safety through Intermediate Hidden States](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05644/) (2024)
- [Self-Guard: Empower the LLM to Safeguard Itself](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15851/) (2023)
- [When LLM Meets DRL: Advancing Jailbreaking Efficiency via DRL-guided Search](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08705/) (2024)
- [AttackEval: How to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Jailbreak Attacking on Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.09002/) (2024)
- [RePD: Defending Jailbreak Attack through a Retrieval-based Prompt Decomposition Process](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.08660/) (2024)
- [Jailbreaking to Jailbreak](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.09638/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have raised concerns about jailbreaking attacks, i.e., prompts that bypass safety mechanisms. This paper investigates the use of multi-agent LLM systems as a defence against such attacks. We evaluate three jailbreaking strategies, including the original AutoDefense attack and two from Deepleaps: BetterDan and JB. Reproducing the AutoDefense framework, we compare single-agent setups with two- and three-agent configurations. Our results show that multi-agent systems enhance resistance to jailbreaks, especially by reducing false negatives. However, its effectiveness varies by attack type, and it introduces trade-offs such as increased false positives and computational overhead. These findings point to the limitations of current automated defences and suggest directions for improving alignment robustness in future LLM systems.