mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Broken-Token: Filtering Obfuscated Prompts by Counting Characters-Per-Token

arXiv 2510.26847 ↗First posted 30 Oct 2025cs.CR cs.AI cs.CLcited by 1

On the map: LLM safety and security → Jailbreaking

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) are susceptible to jailbreak attacks where malicious prompts are disguised using ciphers and character-level encodings to bypass safety guardrails. While these guardrails often fail to interpret the encoded content, the underlying models can still process the harmful instructions. We introduce CPT-Filtering, a novel, model-agnostic with negligible-costs and near-perfect accuracy guardrail technique that aims to mitigate these attacks by leveraging the intrinsic behavior of Byte-Pair Encoding (BPE) tokenizers. Our method is based on the principle that tokenizers, trained on natural language, represent out-of-distribution text, such as ciphers, using a significantly higher number of shorter tokens. Our technique uses a simple yet powerful artifact of using language models: the average number of Characters Per Token (CPT) in the text. This approach is motivated by the high compute cost of modern methods - relying on added modules such as dedicated LLMs or perplexity models. We validate our approach across a large dataset of over 100,000 prompts, testing numerous encoding schemes with several popular tokenizers. Our experiments demonstrate that a simple CPT threshold robustly identifies encoded text with high accuracy, even for very short inputs. CPT-Filtering provides a practical defense layer that can be immediately deployed for real-time text filtering and offline data curation.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Jailbreaking, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 11 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Oct 2025.

Builds on

11 of 21 references.

Closest ancestors · 5

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024An Interpretable N-gram Perplexity Threat Model for Large Language Model Jailbreaks21 Oct
  2. 2024StructuralSleight: Automated Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models Utilizing Uncommon Text-Organization Structures13 Jun
  3. 2023AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Models3 Oct
  4. 2023GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via Cipher12 Aug
  5. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?5 Jul

Other references · 6

  1. 2015Neural Machine Translation of Rare Words with Subword Unitscited by 2,918
  2. 2022Ignore Previous Prompt: Attack Techniques For Language Modelscited by 832
  3. 2023Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Modelscited by 651
  4. 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 365
  5. 2023Visual Adversarial Examples Jailbreak Aligned Large Language Modelscited by 328
  6. 2021Bad Characters: Imperceptible NLP Attackscited by 71

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025TokenBreak: Bypassing Text Classification Models Through Token Manipulation
  2. 2024SequentialBreak: Large Language Models Can be Fooled by Embedding Jailbreak Prompts into Sequential Prompt Chains
  3. 2025Prefill-level Jailbreak: A Black-Box Risk Analysis of Large Language Models
  4. 2026The Tokens Remember: When Tokenization Bypasses Knowledge Editing and Unlearning
  5. 2025RoguePrompt: Dual-Layer Ciphering for Self-Reconstruction to Circumvent LLM Moderation
  6. 2024Defending Large Language Models against Jailbreak Attacks via Semantic Smoothing
  7. 2024Jailbreaking Large Language Models Through Alignment Vulnerabilities in Out-of-Distribution Settings
  8. 2024Prefix Guidance: A Steering Wheel for Large Language Models to Defend Against Jailbreak Attacks