This work proposes Routing-based On-Policy Distillation (ROPD), a novel realignment framework that models the divergence between aligned and compromised output probability distributions rather than fitting specific prompt templates, establishing a new standard for robust LLM realignment.
Abstract
Fine-tuning is the dominant paradigm for specializing large language models (LLMs), yet it exposes a critical vulnerability: malicious data providers can embed harmful behaviors into downstream corpora, creating models that retain professional skills while violating human values on demand. Existing safety-realignment defenses often fail in practice due to three key limitations: they frequently cause catastrophic forgetting of specialized skills; their effectiveness collapses when the defender cannot observe the attacker's prompt template; and successfully realigned models remain susceptible to re-jailbreaking via simple system prompt switches. To address these challenges, we propose Routing-based On-Policy Distillation (ROPD), a novel realignment framework that models the divergence between aligned and compromised output probability distributions rather than fitting specific prompt templates. We conduct extensive experiments comparing ROPD against four state-of-the-art baselines across three datasets and three base models with varying alignment strengths. Our results demonstrate that when baseline defenses face template mismatches, often accompanied by severe degradation in downstream task performance. In contrast, ROPD substantially mitigates template-mismatch risks, maintaining superior robustness in both defense effectiveness and capability preservation. While our analysis indicates ROPD is not entirely immune to template shifts, its performance degradation is negligible compared to existing methods, establishing a new standard for robust LLM realignment.
As large language model agents increasingly operate autonomously with access to tools and external environments, ensuring their safe and reliable behavior becomes critical. We present GuardianAgentBench (GABench), a benchmark of 580 scenarios across six domains evaluated on three production-ready frameworks: LangChain, LlamaIndex, and Vectara. The benchmark incorporates rigorous multi-stage validation and five adversarial attack modes. Experiments with six state-of-the-art models reveal that even the strongest configuration achieves only 74.8% overall accuracy and expose two distinct failure regimes: stronger models under-call required tools, while weaker models mis-select and over-call tools. Performance degrades monotonically with both tool-set size and sequential turn depth, with long-horizon planning proving the steeper bottleneck. Our guardrail implementation consistently outperforms system-prompt-based defenses across all models, recovering 19.9% of failures at a false positive rate of just 0.5%. These results demonstrate that execution-time structural intervention improves safety without disrupting correct agent behavior.
V. Naik, Chenyu Xu, Donna Dong et al.· 0 citations
Jailbreak defenses are essential for protecting large language models (LLMs), but they can also introduce secondary costs that weaken model utility. We present a systematic study of these defense trade-offs along three dimensions: performance impact, over-refusal on benign inputs, and inference cost. Rather than treating defenses as a single class, we organize them by operational strategy and examine how different strategies correlate with different side-effect profiles. Across state-of-the-art defense methods, widely used benchmark datasets, and representative open-source LLMs, we find that defenses rarely improve downstream capability, but instead vary in how they trade safety gains against usability and efficiency. In particular, rule-based defenses best preserve task performance, highly conservative self-reflective defenses often increase over-refusal, and multi-round defenses incur the largest runtime overhead. These results provide both a benchmark for evaluating defense side effects and practical guidance for selecting defenses under deployment constraints.
Tong Zhang, Zexin Li, Simin Chen et al.· 0 citations
Reliable evaluation of tool routing is critical as Large Language Models increasingly operate as autonomous agents. Current benchmarks face three structural limitations: data distributions that follow a power law leave rare scenarios underrepresented; the absence of adversarial hard negatives obscures performance differences across models; and annotation pipelines depend on LLM judgments that have not been validated through execution. In this paper, we introduce PluginEval, a benchmark constructed through a two-stage framework that systematically mitigates these limitations. First, we formulate tool routing as a sequence of three decisions and separate generation from verification. LLMs propose candidate calls, while deterministic validation and real API execution provide reliable quality signals. Second, we decompose each plugin by capability, intent, and boundary to identify trigger and exclusion scenarios. We then generate queries at different difficulty levels to fill coverage gaps, including adversarial negatives targeting three failure modes, and return them to the first stage for annotation. This process creates a closed loop that iterates until coverage converges. For evaluation, we move beyond aggregate accuracy. An LLM judge anchored to gold annotations classifies failures as missed calls, spurious calls, or parameter errors, producing a detailed error profile for each model. We evaluate five model families, including proprietary models and models with open weights, analyze their performance across difficulty levels and error categories, and validate the judge through agreement with human annotations.
Large Language Models (LLMs) have been integrated into complex ecosystems (e.g., Code Agents), while Indirect Prompt Injection (IPI) attacks have emerged as critical barriers to their safe deployment. Attackers exploit LLMs'indistinguishability between"instructions"and"data"to manipulate LLMs via maliciously injected instructions. Existing defenses, however, face an intractable safety-utility trade-off: most guardrails either incur high latency or suffer from severe over-refusal. In this paper, we first demonstrate that LLMs can separate instruction from data intrinsically with both theoretical and empirical evidence. Inspired by this insight, we propose AEGIS (Adaptive Ensemble Guard for Injection Shielding). AEGIS extracts instruction-sensitive projectors to identify malicious instructions and leverages a Unified Multi-Layer Consensus mechanism that aggregates topologically distinct signals across the network depth. Empirical evaluations show that AEGIS achieves remarkable detection performance against both heuristic and optimization-based attacks compared to baselines, highlighting its potential to mitigate IPI. Code is available at https://github.com/xaddwell/AEGIS
Jiahao Chen, Ruiping Yin, Xinfeng Li et al.· 0 citations
Released aligned large language models remain vulnerable to malicious downstream finetuning. Existing defenses are largely designed for the fine-tuning-as-a-service (FTaaS) paradigm or rely on downstream users to follow additional safety procedures, and therefore do not directly address the setting we study: a provider controlled partially protected open-weight (PPOW) release setting in which most weights remain trainable while a small safety-critical component is preserved at release. We propose a Unidirectional Safety Gate (USG), instantiated as a Null Space Cubic Layer together with an Inverse Adapter inserted after the final Transformer layer. During downstream fine-tuning, the cubic layer suppresses or blocks gradients from harmful samples whose hidden states fall in a calibrated protected region, while the Inverse Adapter restores the base model's forward behavior. In practice, we calibrate a threshold using defender-held harmful data, allowing protection to generalize to nearby in-distribution harmful samples. Across six evaluated model-dataset settings, USG keeps post-finetuning attack success rate close to the pre-release level under a fixed release threshold, while maintaining high safe-pass rates on easier settings and exhibiting a clearer safety-utility trade-off on unsafe samples from BeaverTails. These results suggest that release-time representation-space blocking can raise the cost of malicious downstream adaptation without requiring downstream cooperation. The code is available at https://github.com/OpenCausaLab/Gradient-Immunity.
Yuxuan Huang, Xingyu Zeng, Tianhang Zheng et al.· 0 citations
