Synthetic data is often perceived as a silver-bullet solution to data anonymization and privacy-preserving data publishing. Drawn from generative models like diffusion models, synthetic data is expected to preserve the statistical properties of the original dataset while remaining resilient to privacy attacks. Recent developments of diffusion models have been effective on a wide range of data types, but their privacy resilience, particularly for tabular formats, remains largely unexplored. MIDST challenge sought a quantitative evaluation of the privacy gain of synthetic tabular data generated by diffusion models, with a specific focus on its resistance to membership inference attacks (MIAs). Given the heterogeneity and complexity of tabular data, multiple target models were explored for MIAs, including diffusion models for single tables of mixed data types and multi-relational tables with interconnected constraints. MIDST inspired the development of novel black-box and white-box MIAs tailored to these target diffusion models as a key outcome, enabling a comprehensive evaluation of their privacy efficacy. The MIDST GitHub repository is available at https://github.com/VectorInstitute/MIDST

As increasingly capable open-weight large language models (LLMs) are deployed, improving their tamper resistance against unsafe modifications, whether accidental or intentional, becomes critical to minimize risks. However, there is no standard approach to evaluate tamper resistance. Varied data sets, metrics, and tampering configurations make it difficult to compare safety, utility, and robustness across different models and defenses. To this end, we introduce TamperBench, the first unified framework to systematically evaluate the tamper resistance of LLMs. TamperBench (i) curates a repository of state-of-the-art weight-space fine-tuning attacks and latent-space representation attacks; (ii) enables realistic adversarial evaluation through systematic hyperparameter sweeps per attack-model pair; and (iii) provides both safety and utility evaluations. TamperBench requires minimal additional code to specify any fine-tuning configuration, alignment-stage defense method, and metric suite while ensuring end-to-end reproducibility. We use TamperBench to evaluate 21 open-weight LLMs, including defense-augmented variants, across nine tampering threats using standardized safety and capability metrics with hyperparameter sweeps per model-attack pair. This yields novel insights, including effects of post-training on tamper resistance, that jailbreak-tuning is typically the most severe attack, and that Triplet emerges as a leading alignment-stage defense. Code is available at: https://github.com/criticalml-uw/TamperBench

Designing front-ends for speech deepfake detectors primarily focuses on two categories. Hand-crafted filterbank features are transparent but are limited in capturing high-level semantic details, often resulting in performance gaps compared to self-supervised (SSL) features. SSL features, in turn, lack interpretability and may overlook fine-grained spectral anomalies. We propose the WST-X series, a novel family of feature extractors that combines the best of both worlds via the wavelet scattering transform (WST), integrating wavelets with nonlinearities analogous to deep convolutional networks. We investigate 1D and 2D WSTs to extract acoustic details and higher-order structural anomalies, respectively. Experimental results on the recent and challenging Deepfake-Eval-2024 dataset indicate that WST-X outperforms existing front-ends by a wide margin. Our analysis reveals that a small averaging scale ($J$), combined with high-frequency and directional resolutions ($Q, L$), is critical for capturing subtle artifacts. This underscores the value of translation-invariant and deformation-stable features for robust and interpretable speech deepfake detection.

Frontier language model agents can exhibit misaligned behaviors, including deception, exploiting reward hacks, and pursuing hidden objectives. To control potentially misaligned agents, we can use LLMs themselves to monitor for misbehavior. In this paper, we study how information access affects LLM monitor performance. While one might expect that monitors perform better when they have access to more of the monitored agents' reasoning and actions, we find that contemporary systems often perform better with less information, a phenomenon we call the less-is-more effect for automated oversight. We demonstrate this phenomenon, and analyze the conditions under which it occurs, in three evaluation environments where agents must conduct sabotage while evading monitors. Leveraging this effect, we introduce extract-and-evaluate (EaE) monitoring -- a new hierarchical approach where one monitor isolates relevant excerpts from the monitored agent's trajectory and another monitor scores these excerpts. In BigCodeBench-Sabotage with a GPT-4.1-mini monitor, EaE improves sabotage detection rates by 16.8 percentage points over the next-best approach. In other settings, EaE either outperforms or is competitive with baselines. In addition, we find that agents unaware of being monitored can be caught much more easily and that monitors scoring longer reasoning traces gain more from information filtering. Lastly, we conduct a cost-performance analysis and find that Gemini and Claude models with monitoring techniques that involve information filtering occupy much of the Pareto frontier.

Existing automated attack suites operate as static ensembles with fixed sequences, lacking strategic adaptation and semantic awareness. This paper introduces the Agentic Reasoning for Methods Orchestration and Reparameterization (ARMOR) framework to address these limitations. ARMOR orchestrates three canonical adversarial primitives, Carlini-Wagner (CW), Jacobian-based Saliency Map Attack (JSMA), and Spatially Transformed Attacks (STA) via Vision Language Models (VLM)-guided agents that collaboratively generate and synthesize perturbations through a shared ``Mixing Desk". Large Language Models (LLMs) adaptively tune and reparameterize parallel attack agents in a real-time, closed-loop system that exploits image-specific semantic vulnerabilities. On standard benchmarks, ARMOR achieves improved cross-architecture transfer and reliably fools both settings, delivering a blended output for blind targets and selecting the best attack or blended attacks for white-box targets using a confidence-and-SSIM score.

Fine-tuning LLMs on benign data can still degrade alignment and adversarial robustness, yet direct analysis of the role of fine-tuning objectives in shaping these safety outcomes remain limited. We present a controlled comparison of six fine-tuning objectives -- Supervised Fine-Tuning, Direct Preference Optimization, Conditional Fine-Tuning, Inoculation Prompting, Odds Ratio Preference Optimization, and KL-regularized fine-tuning -- holding data, domain, architecture, and optimization fixed. Across closed-form reasoning and open-ended generation tasks, we find that objective choice induces systematic, scale-dependent shifts along the safety-capability frontier. At small training budgets, robustness is similar across objectives but capability differs. At larger budgets, objectives diverge sharply: supervised and preference-based tuning tightly couple capability gains to increased adversarial vulnerability and persona drift, while objectives that constrain learning signals -- especially ORPO and KL-regularization -- substantially mitigate both. Fine-tuning objectives therefore matter little for safety at small scales but become a primary driver of adversarial robustness and latent persona stability as training scale increases.

AI agents are vulnerable to prompt injection attacks, where malicious content hijacks agent behavior to steal credentials or cause financial loss. The only known robust defense is architectural isolation that strictly separates trusted task planning from untrusted environment observations. However, applying this design to Computer Use Agents (CUAs) -- systems that automate tasks by viewing screens and executing actions -- presents a fundamental challenge: current agents require continuous observation of UI state to determine each action, conflicting with the isolation required for security. We resolve this tension by demonstrating that UI workflows, while dynamic, are structurally predictable. We introduce Single-Shot Planning for CUAs, where a trusted planner generates a complete execution graph with conditional branches before any observation of potentially malicious content, providing provable control flow integrity guarantees against arbitrary instruction injections. Although this architectural isolation successfully prevents instruction injections, we show that additional measures are needed to prevent Branch Steering attacks, which manipulate UI elements to trigger unintended valid paths within the plan. We evaluate our design on OSWorld, and retain up to 57% of the performance of frontier models while improving performance for smaller open-source models by up to 19%, demonstrating that rigorous security and utility can coexist in CUAs.

Prompt injection was initially framed as the large language model (LLM) analogue of SQL injection. However, over the past three years, attacks labeled as prompt injection have evolved from isolated input-manipulation exploits into multistep attack mechanisms that resemble malware. In this paper, we argue that prompt injections evolved into promptware, a new class of malware execution mechanism triggered through prompts engineered to exploit an application's LLM. We introduce a seven-stage promptware kill chain: Initial Access (prompt injection), Privilege Escalation (jailbreaking), Reconnaissance, Persistence (memory and retrieval poisoning), Command and Control, Lateral Movement, and Actions on Objective. We analyze thirty-six prominent studies and real-world incidents affecting production LLM systems and show that at least twenty-one documented attacks that traverse four or more stages of this kill chain, demonstrating that the threat model is not merely theoretical. We discuss the need for a defense-in-depth approach that addresses all stages of the promptware life cycle and review relevant countermeasures for each step. By moving the conversation from prompt injection to a promptware kill chain, our work provides analytical clarity, enables structured risk assessment, and lays a foundation for systematic security engineering of LLM-based systems.

Large language models (LLMs) are equipped with safety mechanisms to detect and block harmful queries, yet current alignment approaches primarily focus on overtly dangerous content and overlook more subtle threats. However, users can often disguise harmful intent through covert rephrasing that preserves malicious objectives while appearing benign, which creates a significant gap in existing safety training data. To address this limitation, we introduce HarmTransform, a multi-agent debate framework for systematically transforming harmful queries into stealthier forms while preserving their underlying harmful intent. Our framework leverages iterative critique and refinement among multiple agents to generate high-quality, covert harmful query transformations that can be used to improve future LLM safety alignment. Experiments demonstrate that HarmTransform significantly outperforms standard baselines in producing effective query transformations. At the same time, our analysis reveals that debate acts as a double-edged sword: while it can sharpen transformations and improve stealth, it may also introduce topic shifts and unnecessary complexity. These insights highlight both the promise and the limitations of multi-agent debate for generating comprehensive safety training data.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained to refuse to respond to harmful content. However, systematic analyses of whether this behavior is truly a reflection of its safety policies or an indication of political censorship, that is practiced globally by countries, is lacking. Differentiating between safety influenced refusals or politically motivated censorship is hard and unclear. For this purpose we introduce PSP, a dataset built specifically to probe the refusal behaviors in LLMs from an explicitly political context. PSP is built by formatting existing censored content from two data sources, openly available on the internet: sensitive prompts in China generalized to multiple countries, and tweets that have been censored in various countries. We study: 1) impact of political sensitivity in seven LLMs through data-driven (making PSP implicit) and representation-level approaches (erasing the concept of politics); and, 2) vulnerability of models on PSP through prompt injection attacks (PIAs). Associating censorship with refusals on content with masked implicit intent, we find that most LLMs perform some form of censorship. We conclude with summarizing major attributes that can cause a shift in refusal distributions across models and contexts of different countries.

The availability of high-quality, AI-generated audio raises security challenges such as misinformation campaigns and voice-cloning fraud. A key defense against the misuse of AI-generated audio is by watermarking it, so that it can be easily distinguished from genuine audio. As those seeking to misuse AI-generated audio may thus seek to remove audio watermarks, studying effective watermark removal techniques is critical to being able to objectively evaluate the robustness of audio watermarks against removal. Previous watermark removal schemes either assume impractical knowledge of the watermarks they are designed to remove or are computationally expensive, potentially generating a false sense of confidence in current watermark schemes. We introduce HarmonicAttack, an efficient audio watermark removal method that only requires the basic ability to generate the watermarks from the targeted scheme and nothing else. With this, we are able to train a general watermark removal model that is able to remove the watermarks generated by the targeted scheme from any watermarked audio sample. HarmonicAttack employs a dual-path convolutional autoencoder that operates in both temporal and frequency domains, along with GAN-style training, to separate the watermark from the original audio. When evaluated against state-of-the-art watermark schemes AudioSeal, WavMark, and Silentcipher, HarmonicAttack demonstrates greater watermark removal ability than previous watermark removal methods with near real-time performance. Moreover, while HarmonicAttack requires training, we find that it is able to transfer to out-of-distribution samples with minimal degradation in performance.

Modern generative diffusion models rely on vast training datasets, often including images with uncertain ownership or usage rights. Radioactive watermarks -- marks that transfer to a model's outputs -- can help detect when such unauthorized data has been used for training. Moreover, aside from being radioactive, an effective watermark for protecting images from unauthorized training also needs to meet other existing requirements, such as imperceptibility, robustness, and multi-bit capacity. To overcome these challenges, we propose HMARK, a novel multi-bit watermarking scheme, which encodes ownership information as secret bits in the semantic-latent space (h-space) for image diffusion models. By leveraging the interpretability and semantic significance of h-space, ensuring that watermark signals correspond to meaningful semantic attributes, the watermarks embedded by HMARK exhibit radioactivity, robustness to distortions, and minimal impact on perceptual quality. Experimental results demonstrate that HMARK achieves 98.57% watermark detection accuracy, 95.07% bit-level recovery accuracy, 100% recall rate, and 1.0 AUC on images produced by the downstream adversarial model finetuned with LoRA on watermarked data across various types of distortions.

A common method of attacking deep learning models is through adversarial attacks, which occur when an attacker specifically modifies the input of a model to produce an incorrect result. Adversarial attacks have been deeply investigated in the image domain; however, there is less research in the time-series domain and very little for forecasting financial data. To address these concerns, this study aims to build upon previous research on adversarial attacks for time-series data by introducing two new slope-based methods aimed to alter the trends of the predicted stock forecast generated by an N-HiTS model. Compared to the normal N-HiTS predictions, the two new slope-based methods, the General Slope Attack and Least-Squares Slope Attack, can manipulate N-HiTS predictions by doubling the slope. These new slope attacks can bypass standard security mechanisms, such as a discriminator that filters real and perturbed inputs, reducing a 4-layered CNN's specificity to 28% and accuracy to 57%. Furthermore, the slope based methods were incorporated into a GAN architecture as a means of generating realistic synthetic data, while simultaneously fooling the model. Finally, this paper also proposes a sample malware designed to inject an adversarial attack in the model inference library, proving that ML-security research should not only focus on making the model safe, but also securing the entire pipeline.

Foundation models trained on large-scale de-identified electronic health records (EHRs) hold promise for clinical applications. However, their capacity to memorize patient information raises important privacy concerns. In this work, we introduce a suite of black-box evaluation tests to assess privacy-related memorization risks in foundation models trained on structured EHR data. Our framework includes methods for probing memorization at both the embedding and generative levels, and aims to distinguish between model generalization and harmful memorization in clinically relevant settings. We contextualize memorization in terms of its potential to compromise patient privacy, particularly for vulnerable subgroups. We validate our approach on a publicly available EHR foundation model and release an open-source toolkit to facilitate reproducible and collaborative privacy assessments in healthcare AI.

We study black-box detection of machine-generated text under practical constraints: the scoring model (proxy LM) may mismatch the unknown source model, and per-input contrastive generation is costly. We propose SurpMark, a reference-based detector that summarizes a passage by the dynamics of its token surprisals. SurpMark quantizes surprisals into interpretable states, estimates a state-transition matrix for the test text, and scores it via a generalized Jensen-Shannon (GJS) gap between the test transitions and two fixed references (human vs. machine) built once from historical corpora. We prove a principled discretization criterion and establish the asymptotic normality of the decision statistic. Empirically, across multiple datasets, source models, and scenarios, SurpMark consistently matches or surpasses baselines; our experiments corroborate the statistic's asymptotic normality, and ablations validate the effectiveness of the proposed discretization.

Modern front-end design for speech deepfake detection relies on full fine-tuning of large pre-trained models like XLSR. However, this approach is not parameter-efficient and may lead to suboptimal generalization to realistic, in-the-wild data types. To address these limitations, we introduce a new family of parameter-efficient front-ends that fuse prompt-tuning with classical signal processing transforms. These include FourierPT-XLSR, which uses the Fourier Transform, and two variants based on the Wavelet Transform: WSPT-XLSR and Partial-WSPT-XLSR. We further propose WaveSP-Net, a novel architecture combining a Partial-WSPT-XLSR front-end and a bidirectional Mamba-based back-end. This design injects multi-resolution features into the prompt embeddings, which enhances the localization of subtle synthetic artifacts without altering the frozen XLSR parameters. Experimental results demonstrate that WaveSP-Net outperforms several state-of-the-art models on two new and challenging benchmarks, Deepfake-Eval-2024 and SpoofCeleb, with low trainable parameters and notable performance gains. The code and models are available at https://github.com/xxuan-acoustics/WaveSP-Net.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in contexts where their failures can have direct sociopolitical consequences. Yet, existing safety benchmarks rarely test vulnerabilities in domains such as political manipulation, propaganda and disinformation generation, or surveillance and information control. We introduce SocialHarmBench, a dataset of 585 prompts spanning 7 sociopolitical categories and 34 countries, designed to surface where LLMs most acutely fail in politically charged contexts. Our evaluations reveal several shortcomings: open-weight models exhibit high vulnerability to harmful compliance, with Mistral-7B reaching attack success rates as high as 97% to 98% in domains such as historical revisionism, propaganda, and political manipulation. Moreover, temporal and geographic analyses show that LLMs are most fragile when confronted with 21st-century or pre-20th-century contexts, and when responding to prompts tied to regions such as Latin America, the USA, and the UK. These findings demonstrate that current safeguards fail to generalize to high-stakes sociopolitical settings, exposing systematic biases and raising concerns about the reliability of LLMs in preserving human rights and democratic values. We share the SocialHarmBench benchmark at https://huggingface.co/datasets/psyonp/SocialHarmBench.

Large language models (LLMs) can internally distinguish between evaluation and deployment contexts, a behaviour known as \emph{evaluation awareness}. This undermines AI safety evaluations, as models may conceal dangerous capabilities during testing. Prior work demonstrated this in a single $70$B model, but the scaling relationship across model sizes remains unknown. We investigate evaluation awareness across $15$ models scaling from $0.27$B to $70$B parameters from four families using linear probing on steering vector activations. Our results reveal a clear power-law scaling: evaluation awareness increases predictably with model size. This scaling law enables forecasting deceptive behavior in future larger models and guides the design of scale-aware evaluation strategies for AI safety. A link to the implementation of this paper can be found at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/evaluation-awareness-scaling-laws/README.md.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become critical to modern software development, but their reliance on uncurated web-scale datasets for training introduces a significant security risk: the absorption and reproduction of malicious content. To systematically evaluate this risk, we introduce Scam2Prompt, a scalable automated auditing framework that identifies the underlying intent of a scam site and then synthesizes innocuous, developer-style prompts that mirror this intent, allowing us to test whether an LLM will generate malicious code in response to these innocuous prompts. In a large-scale study of four production LLMs (GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, Llama-4-Scout, and DeepSeek-V3), we found that Scam2Prompt's innocuous prompts triggered malicious URL generation in 4.24% of cases. To test the persistence of this security risk, we constructed Innoc2Scam-bench, a benchmark of 1,559 innocuous prompts that consistently elicited malicious code from all four initial LLMs. When applied to seven additional production LLMs released in 2025, we found the vulnerability is not only present but severe, with malicious code generation rates ranging from 12.7% to 43.8%. Furthermore, existing safety measures like state-of-the-art guardrails proved insufficient to prevent this behavior, with an overall detection rate of less than 0.3%.

While neural ranking models (NRMs) have shown high effectiveness, they remain susceptible to adversarial manipulation. In this work, we introduce Few-Shot Adversarial Prompting (FSAP), a novel black-box attack framework that leverages the in-context learning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate high-ranking adversarial documents. Unlike previous approaches that rely on token-level perturbations or manual rewriting of existing documents, FSAP formulates adversarial attacks entirely through few-shot prompting, requiring no gradient access or internal model instrumentation. By conditioning the LLM on a small support set of previously observed harmful examples, FSAP synthesizes grammatically fluent and topically coherent documents that subtly embed false or misleading information and rank competitively against authentic content. We instantiate FSAP in two modes: FSAP-IntraQ, which leverages harmful examples from the same query to enhance topic fidelity, and FSAP-InterQ, which enables broader generalization by transferring adversarial patterns across unrelated queries. Our experiments on the TREC 2020 and 2021 Health Misinformation Tracks, using four diverse neural ranking models, reveal that FSAP-generated documents consistently outrank credible, factually accurate documents. Furthermore, our analysis demonstrates that these adversarial outputs exhibit strong stance alignment and low detectability, posing a realistic and scalable threat to neural retrieval systems. FSAP also effectively generalizes across both proprietary and open-source LLMs.