Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have demonstrated the ability to interact with humans under real-world conditions by combining Large Language Models (LLMs) and modality encoders to align multimodal information (visual and auditory) with text. However, such models raise new safety challenges of whether models that are safety-aligned on text also exhibit consistent safeguards for multimodal inputs. Despite recent safety-alignment research on vision LMMs, the safety of audio LMMs remains under-explored. In this work, we comprehensively red team the safety of five advanced audio LMMs under three settings: (i) harmful questions in both audio and text formats, (ii) harmful questions in text format accompanied by distracting non-speech audio, and (iii) speech-specific jailbreaks. Our results under these settings demonstrate that open-source audio LMMs suffer an average attack success rate of 69.14% on harmful audio questions, and exhibit safety vulnerabilities when distracted with non-speech audio noise. Our speech-specific jailbreaks on Gemini-1.5-Pro achieve an attack success rate of 70.67% on the harmful query benchmark. We provide insights on what could cause these reported safety-misalignments. Warning: this paper contains offensive examples.

Large Audio Language Models (LALMs) have extended the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) by enabling audio-based human interactions. However, recent research has revealed that LALMs remain vulnerable to harmful queries due to insufficient safety-alignment. Despite advances in defence measures for text and vision LLMs, effective safety-alignment strategies and audio-safety dataset specifically targeting LALMs are notably absent. Meanwhile defence measures based on Supervised Fine-tuning (SFT) struggle to address safety improvement while avoiding over-rejection issues, significantly compromising helpfulness. In this work, we propose an unsupervised safety-fine-tuning strategy as remedy that reshapes model’s representation space to enhance existing LALMs safety-alignment while balancing the risk of over-rejection. Our experiments, conducted across three generations of Qwen LALMs, demonstrate that our approach significantly improves LALMs safety under three modality input conditions (audio-text, text-only, and audio-only) while increasing over-rejection rate by only 0.88% on average. Warning: this paper contains harmful examples.

Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) have achieved great success recently, demonstrating a strong capability to understand multimodal information and to interact with human users. Despite the progress made, the challenge of detecting high-risk interactions in multimodal settings, and in particular in speech modality, remains largely unexplored. Conventional research on risk for speech modality primarily emphasises the content (e.g., what is captured as transcription). However, in speech-based interactions, paralinguistic cues in audio can significantly alter the intended meaning behind utterances. In this work, we propose a speech-specific risk taxonomy, covering 8 risk categories under hostility (malicious sarcasm and threats), malicious imitation (age, gender, ethnicity), and stereotypical biases (age, gender, ethnicity). Based on the taxonomy, we create a small-scale dataset for evaluating current LMMs capability in detecting these categories of risk. We observe even the latest models remain ineffective to detect various paralinguistic-specific risks in speech (e.g., Gemini 1.5 Pro is performing only slightly above random baseline). Warning: this paper contains biased and offensive examples.