Divide, Consult, Conquer：通过已对齐 LLM 实施能力洗白

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Language model safety is typically evaluated one interaction at a time. We show that a weaker, unaligned model can split a harmful task into benign-looking subproblems, consult a stronger aligned model independently on each, and combine the answers locally. We call this attack capability laundering. Unlike a jailbreak, no single response is a harmful task. We measure consultation-aided uplift using tasks that a raw frontier model solves, the aligned frontier refuses, and the unassisted orchestrator fails. We evaluate GPT-5.5, Claude Opus 4.8, and Grok-4.3 as consultants to four local orchestrators on CyBench, BountyBench, and harmful CBRN requests. On CyBench, Gemma-4-31B recovers 8/14 candidates with GPT-5.5 and 7/9 with Opus, compared with 2/21 and 4/15 for Gemma-4-12B. On BountyBench, Gemma-4-31B recovers 3/9 and 2/3 candidates, while Muse-Glimmer-30B recovers none of 22 and 13. For CBRN, we measure uplift across eight steps of a hypothetical bioweapon attack chain and find that consultation raises Gemma-4-31B's mean rubric score from 62.3 to 83.1 on a 100-point rubric scale. These results expose a gap in current defenses: refusing a harmful task does not prevent frontier capabilities from being transferred and composed across many individually permitted interactions.

Subjects:	Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as:	arXiv:2609.15383 [cs.CR]
	(or arXiv:2609.15383v2 [cs.CR] for this version)
	https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.15383 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Ahmed Salem [view email]
[v1] Mon, 14 Sep 2026 11:10:57 UTC (675 KB)
[v2] Mon, 12 Oct 2026 09:08:41 UTC (671 KB)