Latent Fusion Jailbreak: Blending Harmful and Harmless Representations to Elicit Unsafe LLM Outputs
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Safety-aligned large language models can still be manipulated through white-box interventions that modify their internal representations. We introduce Latent Fusion Jailbreak (LFJ), which works by pairing a harmful query with a structurally similar but benign counterpart, then interpolating their hidden states at carefully selected layers and token positions. Refusal-loss gradients determine exactly where to intervene, and we optimise layer-wise mixing coefficients using token-normalised compliance and refusal-suppression objectives. The edited prompt states propagate sequentially through the remaining transformer blocks. Across four safety benchmarks and five open-weight target models, LFJ reaches a macro-averaged attack success rate (ASR) of 94.13% under the white-box protocol we describe. Because LFJ directly accesses internal states, comparisons with prompt-only attacks serve as a descriptive reference rather than a matched evaluation. Dropping rejection sampling lowers ASR to 86.72%, whereas replacing the structured harmful-benign pairing with random pairing causes it to fall to 27.45%. We also design an LFJ-specific latent adversarial training procedure that, when the attack is re-optimised against the defended model, reduces ASR from 94.13% to 12.37%. This defence evaluation does not cover transfer to other attack types or preservation of benign utility.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. First posted on arXiv 8 Aug 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 4.
6 papers.
- 2026The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlookcited by 43
- 2025MCP-Guard: A Multi-Stage Defense-in-Depth Framework for Securing Model Context Protocol in Agentic AIcited by 19
- 2026Text is All You Need for Vision-Language Model Jailbreakingcited by 1
- 2025HGMF: A Hierarchical Gaussian Mixture Framework for Scalable Tool Invocation within the Model Context Protocolcited by 0
- 2026Silencing the Guardrails: Inference-Time Jailbreaking via Dynamic Contextual Representation Ablationcited by 0
- 2026Jailbreaking Open-Weight LLMs via Random Embedding Perturbationscited by 0
- 2026Jailbreaking Open-Weight LLMs via Random Embedding Perturbations5 Oct 2026
- 2026Silencing the Guardrails: Inference-Time Jailbreaking via Dynamic Contextual Representation Ablation9 Apr 2026
- 2026The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlook2 Apr 2026
- 2026Text is All You Need for Vision-Language Model Jailbreaking31 Jan 2026
- 2025MCP-Guard: A Multi-Stage Defense-in-Depth Framework for Securing Model Context Protocol in Agentic AI14 Aug 2025
- 2025HGMF: A Hierarchical Gaussian Mixture Framework for Scalable Tool Invocation within the Model Context Protocol11 Aug 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025LatentBreak: Jailbreaking Large Language Models through Latent Space Feedback
- 2024Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreak Attacks via Layer-specific Editing
- 2025NEXUS: Network Exploration for eXploiting Unsafe Sequences in Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreaks
- 2024Jailbreak Antidote: Runtime Safety-Utility Balance via Sparse Representation Adjustment in Large Language Models
- 2025Paper Summary Attack: Jailbreaking LLMs through LLM Safety Papers
- 2026Circuit Discovery Helps Detect LLM Jailbreaking: A Mechanistic Interpretability Study
- 2025Advancing Jailbreak Strategies: A Hybrid Approach to Exploiting LLM Vulnerabilities and Bypassing Modern Defenses
- 2026MultiBreak: A Scalable and Diverse Multi-turn Jailbreak Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Safety