Fred Morstatter

Large language models (LLMs) undergo safety alignment after training and tuning, yet recent work shows that safety can be bypassed through jailbreak attacks. While many jailbreaks and defenses exist, their cross-lingual generalization remains underexplored. This paper presents the first systematic multilingual evaluation of jailbreaks and defenses across ten languages -- spanning high-, medium-, and low-resource languages -- using six LLMs on HarmBench and AdvBench. We assess two jailbreak types: logical-expression-based and adversarial-prompt-based. For both types, attack success and defense robustness vary across languages: high-resource languages are safer under standard queries but more vulnerable to adversarial ones. Simple defenses can be effective, but are language- and model-dependent. These findings call for language-aware and cross-lingual safety benchmarks for LLMs.

The rise of Large Language Models (LLMs) offers transformative potential for interpreting complex legal frameworks, such as Title 18 Section 175 of the US Code, which governs biological weapons. These systems hold promise for advancing legal analysis and compliance monitoring in sensitive domains. However, this capability comes with a troubling contradiction: while LLMs can analyze and interpret laws, they also demonstrate alarming vulnerabilities in generating unsafe outputs, such as actionable steps for bioweapon creation, despite their safeguards. To address this challenge, we propose a methodology that integrates knowledge graph construction with Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) to systematically evaluate LLMs' understanding of this law, their capacity to assess legal intent (mens rea), and their potential for unsafe applications. Through structured experiments, we assess their accuracy in identifying legal violations, generating prohibited instructions, and detecting unlawful intent in bioweapons-related scenarios. Our findings reveal significant limitations in LLMs' reasoning and safety mechanisms, but they also point the way forward. By combining enhanced safety protocols with more robust legal reasoning frameworks, this research lays the groundwork for developing LLMs that can ethically and securely assist in sensitive legal domains - ensuring they act as protectors of the law rather than inadvertent enablers of its violation.