mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Harder to Defend: Towards Chinese Toxicity Attacks via Implicit Enhancement and Obfuscation Rewriting

arXiv 2605.22258 ↗First posted 21 May 2026cs.CLcited by 0

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) require robust toxicity evaluation beyond explicit wording. This setting remains underexplored in Chinese, where toxicity may combine semantic indirectness with surface obfuscation. We introduce Chinese Implicit Toxicity Attack (CITA), a controlled red-team evaluation and defense-data generation framework, not a deployable evasion tool. CITA uses three stages: (i) Harmful Intent Learning, (ii) Implicit Toxicity Enhancement, and (iii) Obfuscation Variant Rewriting, to preserve harmful intent, increase implicitness, and add controlled surface variants. On CITA-generated evaluation samples, the seven tested detectors exhibit substantial missed-detection risks, reaching an average ASR of 69.48%; human evaluation further confirms preserved harmfulness and increased implicitness/evasiveness. As a downstream defense application, we fine-tune a Chinese Implicit Toxicity Defense model (CITD) with CITA-generated red-team data, showing that such data can improve robustness through additional training.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 19 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2026.

Builds on

19 of 26 references.

References · 19

  1. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
  2. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,330
  3. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,235
  4. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 983
  5. 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
  6. 2022ToxiGen: A Large-Scale Machine-Generated Dataset for Adversarial and Implicit Hate Speech Detectioncited by 419
  7. 2019Social Bias Frames: Reasoning about Social and Power Implications of Languagecited by 377
  8. 2020Learning from the Worst: Dynamically Generated Datasets to Improve Online Hate Detectioncited by 217
  9. 2021Latent Hatred: A Benchmark for Understanding Implicit Hate Speechcited by 216
  10. 2023Explore, Establish, Exploit: Red Teaming Language Models from Scratchcited by 111
  11. 2022COLD: A Benchmark for Chinese Offensive Language Detectioncited by 74
  12. 2023Facilitating Fine-grained Detection of Chinese Toxic Language: Hierarchical Taxonomy, Resources, and Benchmarkscited by 45
7 more
  1. 2021SWSR: A Chinese Dataset and Lexicon for Online Sexism Detectioncited by 42
  2. 2021Mitigating harm in language models with conditional-likelihood filtrationcited by 38
  3. 2024ToxiCloakCN: Evaluating Robustness of Offensive Language Detection in Chinese with Cloaking Perturbationscited by 30
  4. 2025Exploring Multimodal Challenges in Toxic Chinese Detection: Taxonomy, Benchmark, and Findingscited by 10
  5. 2025Lost in Pronunciation: Detecting Chinese Offensive Language Disguised by Phonetic Cloaking Replacementcited by 10
  6. 2025STATE ToxiCN: A Benchmark for Span-level Target-Aware Toxicity Extraction in Chinese Hate Speech Detectioncited by 9
  7. 2025SCCD: A Session-based Dataset for Chinese Cyberbullying Detectioncited by 6

Built on by

Not cited yet.