Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Javier Rando
dblp:257/3128
· DBLP profile ↗
10ranked-venue papers
2as first author
10since 2021 · last 2026
0000-0002-2723-7660ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 9 · 1 first-author · 9 since 2021Security and privacy · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Network and information security
7 papers |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
8 papers |
Language models and text generation · 58% Generative modeling · 12% Representation and self-supervised learning · 11% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Image and video processing · 100% |
Topics — the 20 heaviest of 22, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Security and privacy of machine learning › privacy attack
training data extraction |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | Scalable Extraction of Training Data from Aligned, Production Language Models · ICLR 2025 Measuring Non-Adversarial Reproduction of Training Data in Large Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
multilingual language models |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Apertus: Democratizing Open and Compliant LLMs for Global Language Environments · ACL (1) 2026 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
alignment |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Scalable Extraction of Training Data from Aligned, Production Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Generative modeling
diffusion model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AI · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model › knowledge in language models
memorization |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Measuring Non-Adversarial Reproduction of Training Data in Large Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial defense |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | AutoAdvExBench: Benchmarking Autonomous Exploitation of Adversarial Example Defenses · ICML 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial example |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | AutoAdvExBench: Benchmarking Autonomous Exploitation of Adversarial Example Defenses · ICML 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
poisoning attack |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Persistent Pre-training Poisoning of LLMs · ICLR 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › generative model security
style mimicry protection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AI · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning
reinforcement learning from human feedback |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Universal Jailbreak Backdoors from Poisoned Human Feedback · ICLR 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack
backdoor attack |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Universal Jailbreak Backdoors from Poisoned Human Feedback · ICLR 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial defense
defense evaluation |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dataset and Lessons Learned from the 2024 SaTML LLM Capture-the-Flag Competition · NeurIPS 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
large language model security |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dataset and Lessons Learned from the 2024 SaTML LLM Capture-the-Flag Competition · NeurIPS 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
prompt injection |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Dataset and Lessons Learned from the 2024 SaTML LLM Capture-the-Flag Competition · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Efficient and distributed learning
distributed training |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Apertus: Democratizing Open and Compliant LLMs for Global Language Environments · ACL (1) 2026 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Persistent Pre-training Poisoning of LLMs · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
LLM agents |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | AutoAdvExBench: Benchmarking Autonomous Exploitation of Adversarial Example Defenses · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › AI safety
safety alignment |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Persistent Pre-training Poisoning of LLMs · ICLR 2025 |
Image and video processing › image restoration › image denoising › neural denoising
adversarial denoising |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AI · ICLR 2025 |
Image and video processing › image resampling › image rescaling
image upsampling |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AI · ICLR 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
user study · 2.6adversarial perturbation · 2.6supervised fine-tuning · 1.7prompt-based evaluation · 1.7direct preference optimization · 1.7benchmark evaluation · 1.7adversarial attack · 1.7large language model agents · 0.9large language model agent · 0.9probing · 0.8fine-tuning · 0.8data poisoning · 0.8backdoor triggers · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Apertus: Democratizing Open and Compliant LLMs for Global Language EnvironmentsabstractAlejandro Hernández-Cano, Alexander Hägele, Allen Hao Huang, Angelika Romanou, Antoni-Joan Solergibert, Barna Pásztor, Bettina Messmer, Dhia Garbaya, Eduard Frank Ďurech, Ido Hakimi, Juan Garcia Giraldo, Mete Ismayilzada, Negar Foroutan, Skander Moalla, Tiancheng Chen, Vinko Sabolčec, Yixuan Xu, Michael Aerni, Badr AlKhamissi, Inés Altemir Marinas, Mohammad Hossein Amani, Matin Ansaripour, Ilia Badanin, Harold Benoit, Emanuela Boros, Nicholas John Browning, Fabian Bösch, Maximilian Böther, Niklas Canova, Camille Challier, Clément Charmillot, Jonathan Coles, Jan Milan Deriu, Arnout Devos, Lukas Drescher, Daniil Dzenhaliou, Maud Ehrmann, Dongyang Fan, Simin Fan, Silin Gao, Miguel Gila, María Grandury, Diba Hashemi, Alexander Miserlis Hoyle, Jiaming Jiang, Mark Klein, Andrei Kucharavy, Anastasiia Kucherenko, Frederike Lübeck, Roman Machacek, Theofilos Ioannis Manitaras, Andreas Marfurt, Kyle Matoba, Simon Matrenok, Henrique Mendonça, Fawzi Roberto Mohamed, Syrielle Montariol, Luca Mouchel, Sven Najem-Meyer, Jingwei Ni, Gennaro Oliva, Matteo Pagliardini, Elia Palme, Andrei Panferov, Léo Paoletti, Marco Passerini, Ivan Pavlov, Auguste Poiroux, Kaustubh Ponkshe, Nathan Ranchin, Javier Rando, Mathieu Sauser, Jakhongir Saydaliev, Mukhammadali Sayfiddinov, Marian Schneider, Stefano Schuppli, Marco Scialanga, Andrei Semenov, Kumar Shridhar, Raghav Singhal, Anna Sotnikova, Alexander Sternfeld, Ayush Kumar Tarun, Paul Teiletche, Jannis Vamvas, Xiaozhe Yao, Hao Zhao, Alexander Ilic, Ana Klimovic, Andreas Krause, Caglar Gulcehre, David Rosenthal, Elliott Ash, Florian Tramèr, Joost VandeVondele, Livio Veraldi, Martin Rajman, Thomas C. Schulthess, Torsten Hoefler, Antoine Bosselut, Martin Jaggi, Imanol Schlag. Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2026. Alejandro Hernández-Cano, Alexander Hägele, Allen Hao Huang, Angelika Romanou, Antoni-Joan Solergibert i Llaquet, Barna Pásztor, Bettina Messmer, Dhia Garbaya, Eduard Durech, Ido Hakimi, Juan Garcia Giraldo, Mete Ismayilzada, Negar Foroutan Eghlidi, Skander Moalla, Tiancheng Chen, Vinko Sabolcec, Yixuan Even Xu, Michael Aerni, Badr AlKhamissi, Ines Altemir Marinas, Mohammad Hossein Amani, Matin Ansaripour, Ilia Badanin, Harold Benoit, Emanuela Boros, Nicholas John Browning, Fabian Bösch, Maximilian Böther, Niklas Canova, Camille Challier, Clément Charmillot, Jonathan Coles, Jan Deriu, Arnout Devos, Lukas Drescher, Daniil Dzenhaliou, Maud Ehrmann, Dongyang Fan, Simin Fan, Silin Gao, Miguel Gila, María Grandury, Diba Hashemi, Alexander Miserlis Hoyle, Jiaming Jiang, Mark Klein 0002, Andrei Kucharavy, Anastasiia Kucherenko, Frederike Lübeck, Roman Machacek, Theofilos Ioannis Manitaras, Andreas Marfurt, Kyle Matoba, Simon Matrenok, Henrique Mendonça, Fawzi Roberto Mohamed, Syrielle Montariol, Luca Mouchel, Sven Najem-Meyer, Jingwei Ni, Gennaro Oliva, Matteo Pagliardini, Elia Palme, Andrei Panferov, Léo Paoletti, Marco Passerini, Ivan Pavlov, Auguste Poiroux, Kaustubh Ponkshe, Nathan Ranchin, Javier Rando, Mathieu Sauser, Jakhongir Saydaliev, Mukhammadali Sayfiddinov, Marian Schneider, Stefano Schuppli, Marco Scialanga, Andrei Semenov, Kumar Shridhar, Raghav Singhal, Anna Sotnikova, Alexander Sternfeld, Ayush K. Tarun, Paul Teiletche, Jannis Vamvas, Xiaozhe Yao, Alexander Ilic, Ana Klimovic, Andreas Krause 0001, Caglar Gulcehre, David Rosenthal, Elliott Ash, Florian Tramèr, Joost VandeVondele, Livio Veraldi, Martin Rajman, Thomas C. Schulthess, Torsten Hoefler, Antoine Bosselut, Martin Jaggi, Imanol Schlag |
ACL (1) | 71 |
| 2025 | Measuring Non-Adversarial Reproduction of Training Data in Large Language ModelsabstractLarge language models memorize parts of their training data. Memorizing short snippets and facts is required to answer questions about the world and to be fluent in any language. But models have also been shown to reproduce long verbatim sequences of memorized text when prompted by a motivated adversary. In this work, we investigate an intermediate regime of memorization that we call non-adversarial reproduction, where we quantify the overlap between model responses and pretraining data when responding to natural and benign prompts. For a variety of innocuous prompt categories (e.g., writing a letter or a tutorial), we show that up to 15% of the text output by popular conversational language models overlaps with snippets from the Internet. In worst cases, we find generations where 100% of the content can be found exactly online. For the same tasks, we find that human-written text has far less overlap with Internet data. We further study whether prompting strategies can close this reproduction gap between models and humans. While appropriate prompting can reduce non-adversarial reproduction on average, we find that mitigating worst-case reproduction of training data requires stronger defenses—even for benign interactions. Michael Aerni, Javier Rando, Edoardo Debenedetti, Nicholas Carlini, Daphne Ippolito, Florian Tramèr |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | Adversarial Perturbations Cannot Reliably Protect Artists From Generative AIabstractArtists are increasingly concerned about advancements in image generation models that can closely replicate their unique artistic styles.
In response, several protection tools against style mimicry have been developed that incorporate small adversarial perturbations into artworks published online. In this work, we evaluate the effectiveness of popular protections---with millions of downloads---and show they only provide a false sense of security. We find that low-effort and "off-the-shelf" techniques, such as image upscaling, are sufficient to create robust mimicry methods that significantly degrade existing protections. Through a user study, we demonstrate that **all existing protections can be easily bypassed**, leaving artists vulnerable to style mimicry. We caution that tools based on adversarial perturbations cannot reliably protect artists from the misuse of generative AI, and urge the development of alternative protective solutions. Robert Hönig, Javier Rando, Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramèr |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | Scalable Extraction of Training Data from Aligned, Production Language ModelsabstractLarge language models are prone to *memorizing* some of their training data. Memorized (and possibly sensitive) samples can then be extracted at generation time by adversarial or benign users. There is hope that *model alignment*---a standard training process that tunes a model to harmlessly follow user instructions---would mitigate the risk of extraction. However, we develop two novel attacks that undo a language model's alignment and recover thousands of training examples from popular proprietary aligned models such as OpenAI's ChatGPT. Our work highlights the limitations of existing safeguards to prevent training data leakage in production language models. Milad Nasr, Javier Rando, Nicholas Carlini, Jonathan Hayase, Matthew Jagielski, A. Feder Cooper, Daphne Ippolito, Christopher A. Choquette-Choo, Florian Tramèr, Katherine Lee |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | Persistent Pre-training Poisoning of LLMsabstractLarge language models are pre-trained on uncurated text datasets consisting of trillions of tokens scraped from the Web.
Prior work has shown that: (1) web-scraped pre-training datasets can be practically poisoned by malicious actors; and (2) adversaries can compromise language models after poisoning fine-tuning datasets.
Our work evaluates for the first time whether language models can also be \emph{compromised during pre-training}, with a focus on the persistence of pre-training attacks after models are fine-tuned as helpful and harmless chatbots (i.e., after SFT and DPO).
We pre-train a series of LLMs from scratch to measure the impact of a potential poisoning adversary under four different attack objectives (denial-of-service, belief manipulation, jailbreaking, and prompt stealing), and across a wide range of model sizes (from 600M to 7B).
Our main result is that poisoning only 0.1% of a model's pre-training dataset is sufficient for three out of four attacks to measurably persist through post-training. Moreover, simple attacks like denial-of-service persist through post-training with a poisoning rate of only 0.001%. Javier Rando, Ivan Evtimov, Jianfeng Chi, Eric Michael Smith, Nicholas Carlini, Florian Tramèr, Daphne Ippolito |
ICLR | 2 |
| 2025 | AutoAdvExBench: Benchmarking Autonomous Exploitation of Adversarial Example DefensesabstractWe introduce AutoAdvExBench, a benchmark to evaluate if large language models (LLMs) can autonomously exploit defenses to adversarial examples. Unlike existing security benchmarks that often serve as proxies for real-world tasks, AutoAdvExBench directly measures LLMs’ success on tasks regularly performed by machine learning security experts. This approach offers a significant advantage: if a LLM could solve the challenges presented in AutoAdvExBench, it would immediately present practical utility for adversarial machine learning researchers. While our strongest ensemble of agents can break 87% of CTF-like ("homework exercise") adversarial example defenses, they break just 37% of real-world defenses, indicating a large gap between difficulty in attacking "real" code, and CTF-like code. Moreover, LLMs that are good at CTFs are not always good at real-world defenses; for example, Claude Sonnet 3.5 has a nearly identical attack success rate to Opus 4 on the CTF-like defenses (75% vs 79%), but the on the real-world defenses Sonnet 3.5 breaks just 13% of defenses compared to Opus 4’s 30%. We make this benchmark available at https://github.com/ethz-spylab/AutoAdvExBench. Nicholas Carlini, Edoardo Debenedetti, Javier Rando, Milad Nasr, Florian Tramèr |
ICML | 3 |
| 2024 | Personas as a Way to Model Truthfulness in Language ModelsabstractLarge language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of text from the internet, which contains both factual and misleading information about the world.While unintuitive from a classic view of language models, recent work has shown that the truth value of a statement can be elicited from the model's representations.This paper presents an explanation, persona hypothesis, for why LLMs appear to know the truth despite not being trained with truth labels.We hypothesize that the pretraining data is generated by groups of (un)truthful agents whose outputs share common features, and they form a (un)truthful persona.By training on this data, LMs can infer and represent the persona in its activation space.This allows the model to separate truth from falsehoods and controls the truthfulness of its generation.We show evidence for the persona hypothesis via two observations: (1) we can probe whether a model's answer will be truthful before it is generated; (2) finetuning a model on a set of true facts improves its truthfulness on unseen topics.Next, using arithmetics as a synthetic environment, we show that structures of the pretraining data are crucial for the model to infer the truthful persona.Overall, our findings suggest that models can exploit hierarchical structures in the data to learn abstract concepts like truthfulness. Nitish Joshi, Javier Rando, Abulhair Saparov, Najoung Kim, He He 0001 |
EMNLP | 2 |
| 2024 | Universal Jailbreak Backdoors from Poisoned Human FeedbackabstractReinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to align large language models to produce helpful and harmless responses. Yet, these models can be jailbroken by finding adversarial prompts that revert the model to its unaligned behavior. In this paper, we consider a new threat where an attacker poisons the RLHF data to embed a jailbreak trigger into the model as a backdoor. The trigger then acts like a universal sudo command, enabling arbitrary harmful responses without the need to search for an adversarial prompt. Universal jailbreak backdoors are much more powerful than previously studied backdoors on language models, and we find they are significantly harder to plant using common backdoor attack techniques. We investigate the design decisions in RLHF that contribute to its purported robustness, and release a benchmark of poisoned models to stimulate future research on universal jailbreak backdoors. Javier Rando, Florian Tramèr |
ICLR | 1 |
| 2024 | Dataset and Lessons Learned from the 2024 SaTML LLM Capture-the-Flag CompetitionabstractLarge language model systems face significant security risks from maliciously crafted messages that aim to overwrite the system's original instructions or leak private data. To study this problem, we organized a capture-the-flag competition at IEEE SaTML 2024, where the flag is a secret string in the LLM system prompt. The competition was organized in two phases. In the first phase, teams developed defenses to prevent the model from leaking the secret. During the second phase, teams were challenged to extract the secrets hidden for defenses proposed by the other teams. This report summarizes the main insights from the competition. Notably, we found that all defenses were bypassed at least once, highlighting the difficulty of designing a successful defense and the necessity for additional research to protect LLM systems. To foster future research in this direction, we compiled a dataset with over 137k multi-turn attack chats and open-sourced the platform. Edoardo Debenedetti, Javier Rando, Daniel Paleka, Silaghi Fineas Florin, Dragos Albastroiu, Niv Cohen, Yuval Lemberg, Reshmi Ghosh, Rui Wen 0002, Ahmed Salem 0001, Giovanni Cherubin, Santiago Zanella-Béguelin, Robin Schmid, Victor Klemm, Takahiro Miki, Stefan Kraft, Mario Fritz, Florian Tramèr, Sahar Abdelnabi, Lea Schönherr |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2023 | PassGPT: Password Modeling and (Guided) Generation with Large Language Models
Javier Rando, Fernando Pérez-Cruz, Briland Hitaj |
ESORICS (4) | 1 |