EPS
← All batches·2605.14605

One Step to the Side: Why Defenses Against Malicious Finetuning Fail Under Adaptive Adversaries

topic: current_projecttop score: 100released: 2026-05-15first surfaced: 2026-05-15arXivPDFthreats2026-05-15

Authors: Itay Zloczower, Eyal Lenga, Gilad Gressel et al.

arXiv · PDF

Summary

arXiv:2605. 14605v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model providers increasingly release open weights or allow users to fine-tune foundation models through APIs.

Relevance

Read next because One Step to the Side: Why Defenses Against Malicious Finetuning Fail Under Adaptive Adversaries overlaps with clean result "Language-mismatch LoRA SFT on Qwen2.5-7B leaks the trained completion language into bystander directives the model was never trained on, absent under same-language SFT (LOW confidence)", clean result "Only continuous soft prefixes hit both EM axes at once on Qwen-2.5-7B-Instruct: discrete prompt searches split between the alignment objective and the distributional objective, and both discretizations of the soft prefix collapse (MODERATE confidence)", clean result "Training one persona to emit a [ZLT] marker without bystanders adopting it has a one-cell-wide LR x epochs window on Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (LOW confidence)". Matching terms: rect, under, eval, without, test, model. Source: arxiv cs.CR (Cryptography and Security).

Threat model

Potential threat/caveat for clean result "Language-mismatch LoRA SFT on Qwen2.5-7B leaks the trained completion language into bystander directives the model was never trained on, absent under same-language SFT (LOW confidence)": this item discusses robustness.

Abstract

arXiv:2605.14605v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model providers increasingly release open weights or allow users to fine-tune foundation models through APIs. Although these models are safety-aligned before release, their safeguards can often be removed by fine-tuning on harmful data. Recent defenses aim to make models robust to such malicious fine-tuning, but they are largely evaluated only against fixed attacks that do not account for the defense. We show that these robustness claims are incomplete. Surveying 15 recent defenses, we identify several defense mechanisms and show that they share a single weakness: they obscure or misdirect the path to harmful behavior without removing the behavior itself. We then develop a unified adaptive attack that breaks defenses across all defense mechanisms. Our results show that current approaches do not provide robust security; they mainly stop the attacks they were designed against. We hope that our unified adaptive adversary for this domain will help future researchers and practitioners stress-test new defenses before deployment.