Papers › Dialogue Injection Attack: Jailbreaking LLMs through Context Manipulation

Dialogue Injection Attack: Jailbreaking LLMs through Context Manipulation

11 Mar 2025arXiv:2503.08195archive 2025-07-28

Wenlong Meng, Fan Zhang, Wendao Yao, Zhenyuan Guo, Yuwei Li, Chengkun Wei, Wenzhi Chen

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant utility in a wide range of applications; however, their deployment is plagued by security vulnerabilities, notably jailbreak attacks. These attacks manipulate LLMs to generate harmful or unethical content by crafting adversarial prompts. While much of the current research on jailbreak attacks has focused on single-turn interactions, it has largely overlooked the impact of historical dialogues on model behavior. In this paper, we introduce a novel jailbreak paradigm, Dialogue Injection Attack (DIA), which leverages the dialogue history to enhance the success rates of such attacks. DIA operates in a black-box setting, requiring only access to the chat API or knowledge of the LLM's chat template. We propose two methods for constructing adversarial historical dialogues: one adapts gray-box prefilling attacks, and the other exploits deferred responses. Our experiments show that DIA achieves state-of-the-art attack success rates on recent LLMs, including Llama-3.1 and GPT-4o. Additionally, we demonstrate that DIA can bypass 5 different defense mechanisms, highlighting its robustness and effectiveness.

PaperPDFCode

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections