mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Cognitive Cybersecurity for Artificial Intelligence: Guardrail Engineering with CCS-7

arXiv 2508.10033 ↗First posted 9 Aug 2025cs.CR cs.AIcited by 2

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

Language models exhibit human-like cognitive vulnerabilities, such as emotional framing, that escape traditional behavioral alignment. We present CCS-7 (Cognitive Cybersecurity Suite), a taxonomy of seven vulnerabilities grounded in human cognitive security research. To establish a human benchmark, we ran a randomized controlled trial with 151 participants: a "Think First, Verify Always" (TFVA) lesson improved cognitive security by +7.9% overall. We then evaluated TFVA-style guardrails across 12,180 experiments on seven diverse language model architectures. Results reveal architecture-dependent risk patterns: some vulnerabilities (e.g., identity confusion) are almost fully mitigated, while others (e.g., source interference) exhibit escalating backfire, with error rates increasing by up to 135% in certain models. Humans, in contrast, show consistent moderate improvement. These findings reframe cognitive safety as a model-specific engineering problem: interventions effective in one architecture may fail, or actively harm, another, underscoring the need for architecture-aware cognitive safety testing before deployment.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 7 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Aug 2025.

Builds on

7 of 31 references.

References · 7

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  3. 2023Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-Feedbackcited by 3,442
  4. 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 1,040
  5. 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
  6. 2022Capturing Failures of Large Language Models via Human Cognitive Biasescited by 98
  7. 2025"Think First, Verify Always": Training Humans to Face AI Riskscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025The Silicon Psyche: Anthropomorphic Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models
  2. 2026Benchmarking Jailbreak Guardrails for Embodied Agents
  3. 2026ADVERSA: Measuring Multi-Turn Guardrail Degradation and Judge Reliability in Large Language Models
  4. 2026Triaging Threats to Specialized Guardrails
  5. 2026Towards Modeling Cybersecurity Behavior of Humans in Organizations ↗
  6. 2026TWGuard: A Case Study of LLM Safety Guardrails for Localized Linguistic Contexts
  7. 2026Cognitive Firewall: A Proactive, Zero-Trust, Multi-Gate Framework for LLM Safety
  8. 2025Breaking Minds, Breaking Systems: Jailbreaking Large Language Models via Human-like Psychological Manipulation