Philip Torr

As LLMs increasingly power agents that interact with external tools, tool use has become an essential mechanism for extending their capabilities. These agents typically select tools from growing databases or marketplaces to solve user tasks, creating implicit competition among tool providers and developers for visibility and usage. In this paper, we show that this selection process harbors a critical vulnerability: by iteratively manipulating tool names and descriptions, adversaries can systematically bias agents toward selecting specific tools, gaining unfair advantage over equally capable alternatives. We present ToolTweak, a lightweight automatic attack that increases selection rates from a baseline of around 20% to as high as 81%, with strong transferability between open-source and closed-source models. Beyond individual tools, we show that such attacks cause distributional shifts in tool usage, revealing risks to fairness, competition, and security in emerging tool ecosystems. To mitigate these risks, we evaluate two defenses: paraphrasing and perplexity filtering, which reduce bias and lead agents to select functionally similar tools more equally. All code will be open-sourced upon acceptance.

The integration of new modalities enhances the capabilities of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) but also introduces additional vulnerabilities. In particular, simple visual jailbreaking attacks can manipulate open-source MLLMs more readily than sophisticated textual attacks. However, these underdeveloped attacks exhibit extremely limited cross-model transferability, failing to reliably identify vulnerabilities in closed-source MLLMs. In this work, we analyse the loss landscape of these jailbreaking attacks and find that the generated attacks tend to reside in high-sharpness regions, whose effectiveness is highly sensitive to even minor parameter changes during transfer. To further explain the high-sharpness localisations, we analyse their feature representations in both the intermediate layers and the spectral domain, revealing an improper reliance on narrow layer representations and semantically poor frequency components. Building on this, we propose a Feature Over-Reliance CorrEction (FORCE) method, which guides the attack to explore broader feasible regions across layer features and rescales the influence of frequency features according to their semantic content. By eliminating non-generalizable reliance on both layer and spectral features, our method discovers flattened feasible regions for visual jailbreaking attacks, thereby improving cross-model transferability. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our approach effectively facilitates visual red-teaming evaluations against closed-source MLLMs.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in diverse tasks, yet their safety alignment remains fragile during adaptation. Even when fine-tuning on benign data or with low-rank adaptation, pre-trained safety behaviors are easily degraded, leading to harmful responses in the fine-tuned models. To address this challenge, we propose GuardSpace, a guardrail framework for preserving safety alignment throughout fine-tuning, composed of two key components: a safety-sensitive subspace and a harmful-resistant null space. First, we explicitly decompose pre-trained weights into safety-relevant and safety-irrelevant components using covariance-preconditioned singular value decomposition, and initialize low-rank adapters from the safety-irrelevant ones, while freezing safety-relevant components to preserve their associated safety mechanism. Second, we construct a null space projector that restricts adapter updates from altering safe outputs on harmful prompts, thereby maintaining the original refusal behavior. Experiments with various pre-trained models on multiple downstream tasks demonstrate that GuardSpace achieves superior performance over existing methods. Notably, for Llama-2-7B-Chat fine-tuned on GSM8K, GuardSpace outperforms the state-of-the-art method AsFT, reducing the average harmful score from 14.4% to 3.6%, while improving the accuracy from from 26.0% to 28.0%.

The safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) is becoming increasingly important with their democratization. In this paper, we study the safety degradation that comes with adapting LLMs to new tasks. We attribute this safety compromise to catastrophic forgetting and frame the problem of preserving safety when fine-tuning as a continual learning (CL) problem. We consider the fine-tuning-as-a-service setup where the user uploads their data to a service provider to get a customized model that excels on the user's selected task. We adapt several CL approaches from the literature and systematically evaluate their ability to mitigate safety degradation. These include regularization-based, memory-based, and model merging approaches. We consider two scenarios, (1) benign user data and (2) poisoned user data. Our results demonstrate that CL approaches consistently achieve lower attack success rates than standard fine-tuning. Among these, DER outperforms both other CL methods and existing safety-preserving baselines while maintaining task utility. These findings generalize across three downstream tasks (GSM8K, SST2, Code) and three model families (LLaMA2-7B, Mistral-7B, Gemma-2B), establishing CL as a practical solution to preserve safety.

As Large Language Model (LLM) agents become more capable, their coordinated use in the form of multi-agent systems is anticipated to emerge as a practical paradigm. Prior work has examined the safety and misuse risks associated with agents. However, much of this has focused on the single-agent case and/or setups missing basic engineering safeguards such as access control, revealing a scarcity of threat modeling in multi-agent systems. We investigate the security vulnerabilities of a popular multi-agent pattern known as the orchestrator setup, in which a central agent decomposes and delegates tasks to specialized agents. Through red-teaming a concrete setup representative of a likely future use case, we demonstrate a novel attack vector, OMNI-LEAK, that compromises several agents to leak sensitive data through a single indirect prompt injection, even in the \textit{presence of data access control}. We report the susceptibility of frontier models to different categories of attacks, finding that both reasoning and non-reasoning models are vulnerable, even when the attacker lacks insider knowledge of the implementation details. Our work highlights the importance of safety research to generalize from single-agent to multi-agent settings, in order to reduce the serious risks of real-world privacy breaches and financial losses and overall public trust in AI agents.

Recent advances in end-to-end trained omni-models have significantly improved multimodal understanding. At the same time, safety red-teaming has expanded beyond text to encompass audio-based jailbreak attacks. However, an important bridge between textual and audio jailbreaks remains underexplored. In this work, we study the cross-modality transfer of jailbreak attacks from text to audio, motivated by the semantic similarity between the two modalities and the maturity of textual jailbreak methods. We first analyze the connection between modality alignment and cross-modality jailbreak transfer, showing that strong alignment can inadvertently propagate textual vulnerabilities to the audio modality, which we term the alignment curse. Guided by this analysis, we conduct an empirical evaluation of textual jailbreaks, text-transferred audio jailbreaks, and existing audio-based jailbreaks on recent omni-models. Our results show that text-transferred audio jailbreaks perform comparably to, and often better than, audio-based jailbreaks, establishing them as simple yet powerful baselines for future audio red-teaming. We further demonstrate strong cross-model transferability and show that text-transferred audio attacks remain effective even under a stricter audio-only access threat model.

Diffusion large language models (D-LLMs) offer an alternative to autoregressive LLMs (AR-LLMs) and have demonstrated advantages in generation efficiency. Beyond the utility benefits, we argue that D-LLMs exhibit a previously underexplored safety blessing: their diffusion-style generation confers intrinsic robustness against jailbreak attacks originally designed for AR-LLMs. In this work, we provide an initial analysis of the underlying mechanism, showing that the diffusion trajectory induces a stepwise reduction effect that progressively suppresses unsafe generations. This robustness, however, is not absolute. We identify a simple yet effective failure mode, termed context nesting, where harmful requests are embedded within structured benign contexts, effectively bypassing the stepwise reduction mechanism. Empirically, we show that this simple strategy is sufficient to bypass D-LLMs' safety blessing, achieving state-of-the-art attack success rates across models and benchmarks. Most notably, it enables the first successful jailbreak of Gemini Diffusion, to our knowledge, exposing a critical vulnerability in commercial D-LLMs. Together, our results characterize both the origins and the limits of D-LLMs' safety blessing, constituting an early-stage red-teaming of D-LLMs.

Web-based agents powered by large language models are increasingly used for tasks such as email management or professional networking. Their reliance on dynamic web content, however, makes them vulnerable to prompt injection attacks: adversarial instructions hidden in interface elements that persuade the agent to divert from its original task. We introduce the Task-Redirecting Agent Persuasion Benchmark (TRAP), an evaluation for studying how persuasion techniques misguide autonomous web agents on realistic tasks. Across six frontier models, agents are susceptible to prompt injection in 25\% of tasks on average (13\% for GPT-5 to 43\% for DeepSeek-R1), with small interface or contextual changes often doubling success rates and revealing systemic, psychologically driven vulnerabilities in web-based agents. We also provide a modular social-engineering injection framework with controlled experiments on high-fidelity website clones, allowing for further benchmark expansion.