Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

The Ethics of Interaction: Mitigating Security Threats in LLMs

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2401.12273 v2 pith:2O264N37 submitted 2024-01-22 cs.CR cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.CRcs.AIcs.CL
keywords ethicalllmssecuritysystemsthreatsdataindividualresponses
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

This paper comprehensively explores the ethical challenges arising from security threats to Large Language Models (LLMs). These intricate digital repositories are increasingly integrated into our daily lives, making them prime targets for attacks that can compromise their training data and the confidentiality of their data sources. The paper delves into the nuanced ethical repercussions of such security threats on society and individual privacy. We scrutinize five major threats--prompt injection, jailbreaking, Personal Identifiable Information (PII) exposure, sexually explicit content, and hate-based content--going beyond mere identification to assess their critical ethical consequences and the urgency they create for robust defensive strategies. The escalating reliance on LLMs underscores the crucial need for ensuring these systems operate within the bounds of ethical norms, particularly as their misuse can lead to significant societal and individual harm. We propose conceptualizing and developing an evaluative tool tailored for LLMs, which would serve a dual purpose: guiding developers and designers in preemptive fortification of backend systems and scrutinizing the ethical dimensions of LLM chatbot responses during the testing phase. By comparing LLM responses with those expected from humans in a moral context, we aim to discern the degree to which AI behaviors align with the ethical values held by a broader society. Ultimately, this paper not only underscores the ethical troubles presented by LLMs; it also highlights a path toward cultivating trust in these systems.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. dgMARK: Decoding-Guided Watermarking for Diffusion Language Models

    cs.LG 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Steering the unmasking order of diffusion language models so that tokens at parity-matching positions get revealed first creates a detectable watermark with modest quality loss.

  2. ThumbnailTruth: A Multi-Modal LLM Approach for Detecting Misleading YouTube Thumbnails Across Diverse Cultural Settings

    cs.SI 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Claude 3.5 Sonnet, prompted with thumbnails, subtitles, and video summaries, detects misleading YouTube thumbnails with up to 93.8% accuracy on a new cross-country dataset.

  3. Follow the Flow: Fine-grained Flowchart Attribution with Neurosymbolic Agents

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    FlowPathAgent combines segmentation, VLM-to-Mermaid conversion, and graph tool calls to attribute LLM answers to specific flowchart paths, with a new benchmark showing higher F1 than baselines.

  4. Localizing Persona Representations in LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Persona information is most separable in the final third of LLM layers, and in Llama3's last layer ethical personas share 17.6% of salient activations while political personas have 2.1% to 5.5% unique activations.

  5. ChartLens: Fine-grained Visual Attribution in Charts

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ChartLens uses segmentation and set-of-marks prompting to attribute chart-based answers to specific visual elements, and the authors release a new benchmark for evaluating such attribution.

Pith tools