mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Security and Privacy Prompts in the Wild: What Users Ask LLMs and How LLMs Respond

arXiv 2606.18062 ↗First posted 16 Jun 2026cs.CL cs.AI cs.CRcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) are widely used to fulfill users' information needs; users ask LLMs about the weather, pose educational questions, and consult them for legal assistance. One particularly understudied area is digital security and privacy (S&P), where users may seek LLMs' help on how to secure their online accounts or protect their computers from cyber attacks. To the best of our knowledge, no prior study has collected or analyzed the S&P questions users ask LLMs; prior research on LLM response quality relied on expert-authored S&P misconceptions or FAQs rather than user queries. Drawing from WildChat, a dataset of 3.2M user-LLM conversations collected in the wild, our study identifies 14,727 S&P prompts and categorizes them into nine categories covering a wide range of S&P topics. From the S&P prompts, we sampled 450 and performed a thematic analysis to characterize the S&P questions users ask LLMs. Separate from the thematic analysis, we curated 270 advice-seeking S&P prompts, where users ask for recommendations, guidance, or specific S&P information. We measured LLM response quality and consistency when posing the prompt to LLMs 10 times. We found that commercial LLMs outperform open-weight models (GPT 5.5 provided "good enough" responses on 98% of prompts; Llama 4 on 47%). However, among prompts that received high-quality responses on average, commercial models sometimes produce contradictory responses across runs, risking confusing or misleading users.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 133 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Jun 2026.

Builds on

21 of 133 references.

References · 21

  1. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  4. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  5. 2019BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTcited by 5,462
  6. 2023Capabilities of GPT-4 on Medical Challenge Problemscited by 630
  7. 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 598
  8. 2024WildGuard: Open One-Stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMscited by 460
  9. 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 211
  10. 2024LUQ: Long-text Uncertainty Quantification for LLMscited by 79
  11. 2025The Widespread Adoption of Large Language Model-Assisted Writing Across Societycited by 50
  12. 2024Trust No Bot: Discovering Personal Disclosures in Human-LLM Conversations in the Wildcited by 43
9 more
  1. 2025RocketEval: Efficient Automated LLM Evaluation via Grading Checklistcited by 37
  2. 2023Are Large Language Models a Threat to Digital Public Goods? Evidence from Activity on Stack Overflowcited by 22
  3. 2023Can Large Language Models Provide Security & Privacy Advice? Measuring the Ability of LLMs to Refute Misconceptionscited by 20
  4. 2025User Feedback in Human-LLM Dialogues: A Lens to Understand Users But Noisy as a Learning Signalcited by 19
  5. 2025Incalmo: An Autonomous LLM-assisted System for Red Teaming Multi-Host Networkscited by 17
  6. 2025Taxonomy of User Needs and Actionscited by 13
  7. 2025Estimating LLM Consistency: A User Baseline vs Surrogate Metricscited by 8
  8. 2024Learned, Lagged, LLM-splained: LLM Responses to End User Security Questionscited by 2
  9. 2026Understanding Help Seeking for Digital Privacy, Safety, and Securitycited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.