Papers › GeneBreaker: Jailbreak Attacks against DNA Language Models with Pathogenicity Guidance

GeneBreaker: Jailbreak Attacks against DNA Language Models with Pathogenicity Guidance

28 May 2025arXiv:2505.23839links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Zaixi Zhang, Zhenghong Zhou, Ruofan Jin, Le Cong, Mengdi Wang

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

DNA, encoding genetic instructions for almost all living organisms, fuels groundbreaking advances in genomics and synthetic biology. Recently, DNA Foundation Models have achieved success in designing synthetic functional DNA sequences, even whole genomes, but their susceptibility to jailbreaking remains underexplored, leading to potential concern of generating harmful sequences such as pathogens or toxin-producing genes. In this paper, we introduce GeneBreaker, the first framework to systematically evaluate jailbreak vulnerabilities of DNA foundation models. GeneBreaker employs (1) an LLM agent with customized bioinformatic tools to design high-homology, non-pathogenic jailbreaking prompts, (2) beam search guided by PathoLM and log-probability heuristics to steer generation toward pathogen-like sequences, and (3) a BLAST-based evaluation pipeline against a curated Human Pathogen Database (JailbreakDNABench) to detect successful jailbreaks. Evaluated on our JailbreakDNABench, GeneBreaker successfully jailbreaks the latest Evo series models across 6 viral categories consistently (up to 60\% Attack Success Rate for Evo2-40B). Further case studies on SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and HIV-1 envelope protein demonstrate the sequence and structural fidelity of jailbreak output, while evolutionary modeling of SARS-CoV-2 underscores biosecurity risks. Our findings also reveal that scaling DNA foundation models amplifies dual-use risks, motivating enhanced safety alignment and tracing mechanisms. Our code is at https://github.com/zaixizhang/GeneBreaker.

PaperPDFCodeCode Syntology ran

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

For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2505.23839")

Code

Syntology Ran 2 of 2 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · our draft was wrong.

By repository: official repository: 1 sample from 1 repository, 1 ran; 1 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.

zaixizhang/genebreaker officialmentioned in papermentioned on GitHubpytorch report

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

2 samples harvested; 2 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

2ran · our draft was wrong

Licence: 1 of the 2 samples is pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from zaixizhang/genebreaker. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

read_prompts zaixizhang/genebreaker/auto_jailbreak_hiv.py official repository ran · our draft was wrong CC0-1.0 (permissive) · b4cbaf9d91985b9d · report
encode_sequence identical code first harvested elsewhere ran · our draft was wrong licence of this copy not recorded · d26a4fe41b80fb6e · report

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