One Perturbation, Two Failure Modes: Probing VLM Safety via Embedding-Guided Typographic Perturbations
On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Typographic prompt injection exploits vision language models' (VLMs) ability to read text rendered in images, posing a growing threat as VLMs power autonomous agents. Prior work typically focus on maximizing attack success rate (ASR) but does not explain why certain renderings bypass safety alignment. We make two contributions. First, an empirical study across four VLMs including GPT-4o and Claude, twelve font sizes, and ten transformations reveals that multimodal embedding distance strongly predicts ASR (r=-0.71 to -0.93, p<0.01), providing an interpretable, model agnostic proxy. Since embedding distance predicts ASR, reducing it should improve attack success, but the relationship is mediated by two factors: perceptual readability (whether the VLM can parse the text) and safety alignment (whether it refuses to comply). Second, we use this as a red teaming tool: we directly maximize image text embedding similarity under bounded ℓ_∞ perturbations via CWA-SSA across four surrogate embedding models, stress testing both factors without access to the target model. Experiments across five degradation settings on GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Mistral-Large-3, and Qwen3-VL confirm that optimization recovers readability and reduces safety aligned refusals as two co-occurring effects, with the dominant mechanism depending on the model's safety filter strength and the degree of visual degradation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 10 of its 10 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Apr 2026.
Builds on
10 of 10 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2025SCAM: A Real-World Typographic Robustness Evaluation for Multimodal Foundation Models7 Apr
- 2024SceneTAP: Scene-Coherent Typographic Adversarial Planner against Vision-Language Models in Real-World Environments28 Nov
- 2023FigStep: Jailbreaking Large Vision-Language Models via Typographic Visual Prompts9 Nov
- 2023How Robust is Google's Bard to Adversarial Image Attacks?21 Sep
- 2023Defense-Prefix for Preventing Typographic Attacks on CLIP10 Apr
Other references · 5
- 2024SALAD-Bench: A Hierarchical and Comprehensive Safety Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 225
- 2023AdvCLIP: Downstream-agnostic Adversarial Examples in Multimodal Contrastive Learningcited by 101
- 2023Rethinking Model Ensemble in Transfer-based Adversarial Attackscited by 88
- 2024Jina CLIP: Your CLIP Model Is Also Your Text Retrievercited by 46
- 2025Typographic Attacks in a Multi-Image Settingcited by 8
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Reading Between the Pixels: Linking Text-Image Embedding Alignment to Typographic Attack Success on Vision-Language Models
- 2025VLM-Guard: Safeguarding Vision-Language Models via Fulfilling Safety Alignment Gap
- 2026Render Before Reading: Visual Rendering as a Prompt Injection Defense
- 2025Security Tensors as a Cross-Modal Bridge: Extending Text-Aligned Safety to Vision in LVLM
- 2025Text2VLM: Adapting Text-Only Datasets to Evaluate Alignment Training in Visual Language Models
- 2024ETA: Evaluating Then Aligning Safety of Vision Language Models at Inference Time
- 2026Jailbreaking Vision-Language Models Through the Visual Modality
- 2024MLLM-Protector: Ensuring MLLM's Safety without Hurting Performance