High-quality Data Do not Mean Safe! Poisoning LLMs after Data Selection

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

Safety-aligned Large Language Models remain vulnerable to fine-tuning on small sets of harmful or benign-looking samples. However, prior studies typically assume that poisoned samples directly enter downstream fine-tuning, overlooking quality-based selection in practical training pipelines. To fill this gap, we systematically evaluate both the filtering effects against poisoning and the downstream safety impact of retained data. The results reveal that selection removes many overtly harmful samples, yet some retained high-quality samples can still degrade model safety alignment possibly due to their harmful-like training-update patterns at the layer-wise gradient level. Together, these findings expose a practical vulnerability: safety-degrading influence can pass through quality-based selection via retained high-quality samples. To examine its systematic exploitability, we propose Bi-Stage Quality-Constrained Safety-Degradation Text Optimization (Bi-QSTO), which optimizes poisoned samples under an explicit quality constraint to survive selection while preserving their safety-degrading influence. Across poisoning settings, target models, and filtering rates, Bi-QSTO maintains attack effectiveness before and after selection. Even at 90% filtering, harmful-seeded samples achieve a Poisoning Retention Rate above 90% and Harmful Score of 3.30--4.01. Their attack effectiveness strongly transfers across models and their retention advantage generalizes to additional selection methods.