Understanding the Effects of Safety Unalignment on Large Language Models
John T. Halloran

TL;DR
This paper investigates how safety unalignment methods, especially weight orthogonalization, affect large language models' ability to refuse harmful requests and their susceptibility to malicious activities.
Contribution
It provides a comparative analysis of jailbreak-tuning and weight orthogonalization on various LLMs, revealing the increased malicious capabilities enabled by WO and how fine-tuning can mitigate these risks.
Findings
WO unaligned models are more capable of aiding malicious activities
WO models retain better natural-language performance and fewer hallucinations
Supervised fine-tuning reduces adversarial attack capabilities of WO models
Abstract
Safety alignment has become a critical step to ensure LLMs refuse harmful requests while providing helpful and harmless responses. However, despite the ubiquity of safety alignment for deployed frontier models, two separate lines of recent work--jailbreak-tuning (JT) and weight orthogonalization (WO)--have shown that safety guardrails may be largely disabled, resulting in LLMs which comply with harmful requests they would normally refuse. In spite of far-reaching safety implications, analysis has largely been limited to refusal rates of each unalignment method in isolation, leaving their relative effects on adversarial LLM capabilities unknown. To fill this gap, we study the impact of unaligning six popular LLMs of various sizes across a large number of malicious and benign tasks, using both JT and WO. Across the evaluated models, we show that while refusal degradation is split between…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
