Jailbreak-Tuning: Models Efficiently Learn Jailbreak Susceptibility
Brendan Murphy, Dillon Bowen, Shahrad Mohammadzadeh, Tom Tseng, Julius Broomfield, Adam Gleave, Kellin Pelrine
Abstract
AI systems are rapidly advancing in capability, and frontier model developers broadly acknowledge the need for safeguards against serious misuse. However, this paper demonstrates that fine-tuning, whether via open weights or closed fine-tuning APIs, can produce helpfulonly models with safeguards destroyed. In contrast to prior work which is blocked by modern moderation systems or achieved only partial removal of safeguards or degraded output quality, our jailbreak-tuning method teaches models to generate detailed, high-quality responses to arbitrary harmful requests. For example, Ope-nAI, Google, and Anthropic models will fully comply with requests for CBRN assistance, executing cyberattacks, and other criminal activity. We further show that backdoors can increase not only the stealth but also the severity of attacks. Stronger jailbreak prompts become even more effective in fine-tuning attacks, linking attacks and potentially defenses in the input and weight spaces. Not only are current models vulnerable, more recent ones also appear to be becoming even more vulnerable to these attacks, underscoring the urgent need for tamper-resistant safeguards. Until such safeguards are discovered, companies and policymakers should view the release of any finetunable model as simultaneously releasing its evil twin: equally capable as the original model, and usable for any malicious purpose within its capabilities.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 37f9242f-95d4-4c6d-8498-7387651fc5f9Cited by top-tier papers2
- Panacea: Mitigating Harmful Fine-tuning for Large Language Models via Post-fine-tuning PerturbationYibo Wang, Tiansheng Huang, Li Shen, Huanjin Yao et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 22 citations
- Surgery: Mitigating Harmful Fine-Tuning for Large Language Models via Attention SinkGuozhi Liu, Weiwei Lin, Tiansheng Huang, Ruichao Mo et al.ICML 2026 · 5 citations
Builds on16
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!Xiangyu Qi, Yi Zeng, Tinghao Xie, Pin-Yu Chen et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,104 citations
- Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human FeedbackJosef Dai, Xuehai Pan, Ruiyang Sun, Jiaming Ji et al.ICLR 2024 · 656 citations
- GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via CipherYouliang Yuan, Wenxiang Jiao, Wenxuan Wang, Jen-tse Huang et al.ICLR 2024 · 441 citations
Related papers
- No, of Course I Can! Deeper Fine-Tuning Attacks That Bypass Token-Level Safety MechanismsJoshua Kazdan, Abhay Puri, Rylan Schaeffer, Lisa Yu et al.ICLR 2026
- Attack via Overfitting: 10-shot Benign Fine-tuning to Jailbreak LLMsZhixin Xie, Xurui Song, Jun LuoNeurIPS 2025 · 11 citations
- Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single DirectionAndy Arditi, Oscar Obeso, Aaquib Syed, Daniel Paleka et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 1,166 citations
- Eliciting Harmful Capabilities by Fine-Tuning on Safeguarded OutputsJackson Kaunismaa, John Hughes, Christina Q. Knight, Avery Griffin et al.ICLR 2026 · 7 citations
- Fundamental Limitations in Pointwise Defences of LLM Finetuning APIsXander Davies, Eric Winsor, Alexandra Souly, Tomek Korbak et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 13 citations
