Recent advancements in Large Language Models empower them to follow freeform instructions, including imitating generic or specific demographic personas in conversations. Generic personas refer to an individual from a demographic group (e.g. an Asian person), whereas specific personas can be actual names of historical figures. While the adoption of personas allows dialogue systems to be more engaging and approachable to users, it also carries the potential risk of exacerbating social biases in model responses, further causing societal harms through interactions with users. In this paper, we systematically study "persona biases", which we define to be the sensitivity of harmful dialogue model behaviors to different persona adoptions. We categorize persona biases into biases in harmful expression and harmful agreement, as well as establish a comprehensive evaluation framework to measure persona biases in five aspects: Offensiveness, Toxic Continuation, Regard, Stereotype Agreement, and Toxic Agreement. Additionally, we propose to comprehensively investigate persona biases through experimenting with UniversalPersona, a systematized persona dataset with a comprehensive list of both generic and specific model personas. Through benchmarking on four different models, including Blender, ChatGPT, Alpaca, and Vicuna, our study uncovers significant persona biases in these dialogue systems.Findings of our study underscores the immediate need to revisit the use of persona traits in dialogue agents, to ensure their safe application.