arxiv-2606-29602 SRC-0321 · paperAn Empirical Evaluation of Prompt Injection Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models Across Multilingual and Obfuscated Attack Scenarios
Created: 2026-04-01 · Ingested: 2026-09-19
https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.29602(opens in a new tab)Large Language Models (LLMs) have rapidly evolved, transforming industries by automating complex tasks and generating human-like content. However, as their adoption accelerates, prompt injection vulnerabilities have become increasingly apparent. Malicious actors exploit these weaknesses to generate phishing emails, deceptive websites, nd malware, posing serious security risks. This paper presents an empirical evaluation of six state-of-the-art LLMs (DeepSeek, GPT, Gemini, Grok, Llama, and Qwen) under diverse adversarial prompt scenarios, including direct and multi-stage obfuscated attacks acro
Referenced by
Claims in this catalog that draw on this source, and whether as support or counterpoint.
- supportsAcross six frontier chat models asked to produce phishing, deceptive sites and malware through direct and multi-stage prompts, non-English prompts were complied with more often than English ones, with a mean full-compliance rate of about 76% across natural languages (English about 71%, some languages above 97% on some models), so safety alignment is thinner outside English; simple encodings (Base64, ROT13, hex) lowered compliance to about 59% but did not remove it.
- supportsEncoding a harmful request in Base64, ROT13 or hex lowers full compliance in six frontier chat models from about 76% (natural-language prompts) to about 59%, but the least-complied-with encoding still produced malicious output in about 54% of cases, so obfuscation by encoding is a weaker attack than plain non-English text yet is far from neutralized.