arXiv subjects

Arjun Arunasalam

Publications and source records attributed to Arjun Arunasalam.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Exploring and Developing a Pre-Model Safeguard with Draft Models

Large Language Model (LLM) alignment remains vulnerable to jailbreak attacks that elicit unsafe responses, motivating pre-model and post-model guards. Pre-model guards audit the safety of prompts before invoking target models. However, relying solely on the prompt often leads to high false-negative rates (i.e., jailbreak attacks go undetected). Post-model guards address this issue by auditing both the user prompt and the target model's response. However, they incur a high computational cost, including increased token usage and processing time, because they operate after target model inference. In this paper, we introduce a safeguard design that leverages the transferability of jailbreak attacks to enforce prompt safety before target model inference. We first conduct a systematic study of jailbreak transferability, particularly from LLMs to small language models (SLMs). Through these experiments, we identify key factors influencing transferability. Building on these insights, we observe that responses from smaller draft models reflect the safety implications of those from large target models; \ie given a jailbreak prompt constructed for an LLM, an SLM is likely to be triggered to generate an unaligned response. Based on this observation, our safeguard design leverages speculative inference with SLMs to generate a set of draft responses. It then feeds the original prompt and these drafts into existing guards to predict their safety. We demonstrate that this design reduces the false-negative rate of pre-model guards and offers a low \Efficiency alternative to post-model guards. \textcolor{red}{\bf Notice: This paper contains examples of harmful language.}

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

International Students and Scams: At Risk Abroad

International students (IntlS) in the US refer to foreign students who acquire student visas to study in the US, primarily in higher education. As IntlS arrive in the US, they face several challenges, such as adjusting to a new country and culture, securing housing remotely, and arranging finances for tuition and personal expenses. These experiences, coupled with recent events such as visa revocations and the cessation of new visas, compound IntlS' risk of being targeted by and falling victim to online scams. While prior work has investigated IntlS' security and privacy, as well as general end users' reactions to online scams, research on how IntlS are uniquely impacted by scams remains largely absent. To address this gap, we conduct a two-phase user study comprising surveys (n=48) and semi-structured interviews (n=9). We investigate IntlS' exposure and interactions with scams, post-exposure actions such as reporting, and their perceptions of the usefulness of existing prevention resources and the barriers to following prevention advice. We find that IntlS are often targeted by scams (e.g., attackers impersonating government officials) and fear legal implications or deportation, which directly impacts their interactions with scams (e.g., they may prolong engagement with a scammer due to a sense of urgency). Interestingly, we also find that IntlS may lack awareness of - or access to - reliable resources that inform them about scams or guide them in reporting incidents to authorities. In fact, they may also face unique barriers in enacting scam prevention advice, such as avoiding reporting financial losses, since IntlS are required to demonstrate financial ability to stay in the US. The findings produced by our study help synthesize guidelines for stakeholders to better aid IntlS in reacting to scams.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

Investigating the Impact of Dark Patterns on LLM-Based Web Agents

As users increasingly turn to large language model (LLM) based web agents to automate online tasks, agents may encounter dark patterns: deceptive user interface designs that manipulate users into making unintended decisions. Although dark patterns primarily target human users, their potentially harmful impacts on LLM-based generalist web agents remain unexplored. In this paper, we present the first study that investigates the impact of dark patterns on the decision-making process of LLM-based generalist web agents. To achieve this, we introduce LiteAgent, a lightweight framework that automatically prompts agents to execute tasks while capturing comprehensive logs and screen-recordings of their interactions. We also present TrickyArena, a controlled environment comprising web applications from domains such as e-commerce, streaming services, and news platforms, each containing diverse and realistic dark patterns that can be selectively enabled or disabled. Using LiteAgent and TrickyArena, we conduct multiple experiments to assess the impact of both individual and combined dark patterns on web agent behavior. We evaluate six popular LLM-based generalist web agents across three LLMs and discover that when there is a single dark pattern present, agents are susceptible to it an average of 41% of the time. We also find that modifying dark pattern UI attributes through visual design changes or HTML code adjustments and introducing multiple dark patterns simultaneously can influence agent susceptibility. This study emphasizes the need for holistic defense mechanisms in web agents, encompassing both agent-specific protections and broader web safety measures.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

Implicit Values Embedded in How Humans and LLMs Complete Subjective Everyday Tasks

Large language models (LLMs) can underpin AI assistants that help users with everyday tasks, such as by making recommendations or performing basic computation. Despite AI assistants' promise, little is known about the implicit values these assistants display while completing subjective everyday tasks. Humans may consider values like environmentalism, charity, and diversity. To what extent do LLMs exhibit these values in completing everyday tasks? How do they compare with humans? We answer these questions by auditing how six popular LLMs complete 30 everyday tasks, comparing LLMs to each other and to 100 human crowdworkers from the US. We find LLMs often do not align with humans, nor with other LLMs, in the implicit values exhibited.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Understanding Users' Security and Privacy Concerns and Attitudes Towards Conversational AI Platforms

The widespread adoption of conversational AI platforms has introduced new security and privacy risks. While these risks and their mitigation strategies have been extensively researched from a technical perspective, users' perceptions of these platforms' security and privacy remain largely unexplored. In this paper, we conduct a large-scale analysis of over 2.5M user posts from the r/ChatGPT Reddit community to understand users' security and privacy concerns and attitudes toward conversational AI platforms. Our qualitative analysis reveals that users are concerned about each stage of the data lifecycle (i.e., collection, usage, and retention). They seek mitigations for security vulnerabilities, compliance with privacy regulations, and greater transparency and control in data handling. We also find that users exhibit varied behaviors and preferences when interacting with these platforms. Some users proactively safeguard their data and adjust privacy settings, while others prioritize convenience over privacy risks, dismissing privacy concerns in favor of benefits, or feel resigned to inevitable data sharing. Through qualitative content and regression analysis, we discover that users' concerns evolve over time with the evolving AI landscape and are influenced by technological developments and major events. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for users, platforms, enterprises, and policymakers to enhance transparency, improve data controls, and increase user trust and adoption.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2024

Rethinking How to Evaluate Language Model Jailbreak

Large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly integrated with various applications. To ensure that LLMs do not generate unsafe responses, they are aligned with safeguards that specify what content is restricted. However, such alignment can be bypassed to produce prohibited content using a technique commonly referred to as jailbreak. Different systems have been proposed to perform the jailbreak automatically. These systems rely on evaluation methods to determine whether a jailbreak attempt is successful. However, our analysis reveals that current jailbreak evaluation methods have two limitations. (1) Their objectives lack clarity and do not align with the goal of identifying unsafe responses. (2) They oversimplify the jailbreak result as a binary outcome, successful or not. In this paper, we propose three metrics, safeguard violation, informativeness, and relative truthfulness, to evaluate language model jailbreak. Additionally, we demonstrate how these metrics correlate with the goal of different malicious actors. To compute these metrics, we introduce a multifaceted approach that extends the natural language generation evaluation method after preprocessing the response. We evaluate our metrics on a benchmark dataset produced from three malicious intent datasets and three jailbreak systems. The benchmark dataset is labeled by three annotators. We compare our multifaceted approach with three existing jailbreak evaluation methods. Experiments demonstrate that our multifaceted evaluation outperforms existing methods, with F1 scores improving on average by 17% compared to existing baselines. Our findings motivate the need to move away from the binary view of the jailbreak problem and incorporate a more comprehensive evaluation to ensure the safety of the language model.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2023

Can Large Language Models Provide Security & Privacy Advice? Measuring the Ability of LLMs to Refute Misconceptions

Users seek security & privacy (S&P) advice from online resources, including trusted websites and content-sharing platforms. These resources help users understand S&P technologies and tools and suggest actionable strategies. Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently emerged as trusted information sources. However, their accuracy and correctness have been called into question. Prior research has outlined the shortcomings of LLMs in answering multiple-choice questions and user ability to inadvertently circumvent model restrictions (e.g., to produce toxic content). Yet, the ability of LLMs to provide reliable S&P advice is not well-explored. In this paper, we measure their ability to refute popular S&P misconceptions that the general public holds. We first study recent academic literature to curate a dataset of over a hundred S&P-related misconceptions across six different topics. We then query two popular LLMs (Bard and ChatGPT) and develop a labeling guide to evaluate their responses to these misconceptions. To comprehensively evaluate their responses, we further apply three strategies: query each misconception multiple times, generate and query their paraphrases, and solicit source URLs of the responses. Both models demonstrate, on average, a 21.3% non-negligible error rate, incorrectly supporting popular S&P misconceptions. The error rate increases to 32.6% when we repeatedly query LLMs with the same or paraphrased misconceptions. We also expose that models may partially support a misconception or remain noncommittal, refusing a firm stance on misconceptions. Our exploration of information sources for responses revealed that LLMs are susceptible to providing invalid URLs (21.2% for Bard and 67.7% for ChatGPT) or point to unrelated sources (44.2% returned by Bard and 18.3% by ChatGPT).

cs.HC↗