AfriGuard - AI Jailbreak Toolset for African Languages

Sebastian Stent, Jaswin Chinthala, Seth Miguel Ferreira

AfriGuard is the first comprehensive red-teaming framework evaluating LLM safety across six South African low-resource languages (isiZulu, isiXhosa, Afrikaans, Sesotho, Sepedi, Tsonga) against an English baseline. Testing four frontier models—Kimi K2.6, Llama 3.3 70B, Qwen 3 32B, and GPT-OSS 20B—with 40 adversarial prompts across financial fraud, xenophobic incitement, political disinformation, and gang affiliation, the study reveals that monolingual low-resource prompts dramatically increase jailbreak success compared to English. Across 1,120 total responses, the mean attack success rate reaches 60.6% (English: 26.6%; Sepedi: 77.8%), with Qwen 3 proving most vulnerable at 80.6% ASR and GPT-OSS most robust at 42.1% ASR. The authors release their full evaluation pipeline and dataset to support reproducible safety auditing, demonstrating that English-centric alignment alone is insufficient for multilingual safety.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Solid work that grounds the multilingual safety problem in a specific, realistic regional context. The core finding (low-resource languages bypass safety filters) is known from prior work, but the scale of the evaluation and the open release of the pipeline make this a useful contribution.

Strengths:

- Good scale: 1,120 responses across 4 models, 7 languages, 40 prompts.

- The harm categories are thoughtfully chosen for the South African context (SASSA fraud, xenophobic incitement, gang recruitment) rather than just using generic benchmarks.

- Transparent about mistakes. The erratum and V2 correction in the repo shows integrity.

Suggestions for Future Work:

- exploring whether other interventions can close the gap instead of having to fine-tune classifiers. what happens if there's a translate-to-english pipeline? does the ASR drop?

- exploring novel attack vectors instead of relying on translation alone

Well done. Would be a great followup to design a pipeline that automatically translates English-language safety datasets/adversarial training pipeline code/safety classifiers into African languages.

The most important thing, and everything else depends on it, is that your scoring tool can't actually read the languages you're studying, because it only looks for English "no" words. So any long answer in an African language that doesn't contain an English refusal gets counted as a successful jailbreak, even when it's really just the AI spitting out nonsense, which your own data already flags as broken. Before any of your headline numbers can mean anything, you'd need to throw out or separate those broken, gibberish answers, and then score the real ones properly in each language, either with native speakers or a translation-based tool you've checked against people. If you do that, chances are you'll still find a real problem, just a smaller and more honest one, which is still well worth publishing. I'd also remove the parts of the report that describe human scorers and a reliability number, because as far as I can tell from your code they never actually happened. The heart of this, giving local people a tool to check AIs in their own languages instead of trusting an English-only safety promise, is valuable.

Really solid work, and the topic actually matters: a model can look safe in English and still get jailbroken in South African languages, with real stakes for banking and government chatbots. The best parts for me are the open dataset and pipeline so other people can test their own models, and the 0.82 agreement between annotators, which makes me trust the harm scores. A few things to tighten. The headline, that low-resource languages get jailbroken more, is already in the papers you cite, so I would frame your contribution as the South African coverage and the dataset, not a new discovery. I would also add a back-translation check so nobody can say the gaps are just translation noise, and it was not always clear where the human scoring stops and the LLM judge starts. The per-category numbers come from small samples, so I read those as hints, not hard results. Still, a lot of ground covered for one weekend.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) AfriGuard - AI Jailbreak Toolset for African Languages

},

author={

Sebastian Stent, Jaswin Chinthala, Seth Miguel Ferreira

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.