Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study introduces 3R-Bench, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate the response of large language models (LLMs) to cybersecurity requests within varying conversational contexts. The findings reveal that prior interactions significantly influence LLM compliance, with a marked increase in compliance rates following accepted requests, while dialogue decomposition leads to a substantial decrease in compliance. These results highlight the critical need for context-aware mechanisms in LLMs to balance the refusal of harmful requests with the provision of legitimate cybersecurity assistance.
Prior interactions can boost LLM compliance on cybersecurity requests by over 23%, but dialogue decomposition drastically undermines this effect.
Large Language Models (LLMs) can solve complex problems, but their misuse in high-risk domains can lead to severe consequences. Model providers therefore restrict assistance for potentially harmful requests. Refusing all cybersecurity requests would therefore harm legitimate users. Providers need a mechanism to block malicious use without denying legitimate assistance to defenders. Existing cybersecurity-specific datasets evaluate this mechanism, but none considers the conversational context of a request. We introduce 3R-Bench (Refusal, Repetition, and Revision), a benchmark of 150 real-world cybersecurity requests augmented with two adversarial conversational settings, and evaluate eight LLMs on it. Prior assistant behavior strongly changes responses to an unchanged request: among 376 available pairs from a 400-pair panel, compliance rises from 62.0% after refused history to 85.1% after accepted history. The opposite pattern appears under dialogue decomposition. In comparison, compliance falls from 501/800 direct responses to 172/800 after dialogue; among 738 pairs returning model-authored text in both conditions, the decrease is 45.1 points. Failure feedback recovers only a small fraction of this loss.
