Attacking Byzantine Robust Aggregation in High Dimensions

Read original: arXiv:2312.14461 - Published 4/22/2024 by Sarthak Choudhary, Aashish Kolluri, Prateek Saxena

🏷️

Overview

Training modern neural networks often requires averaging high-dimensional data vectors, which can be vulnerable to poisoning attacks that bias the training process.
Byzantine robust aggregation is a defense that can bound the maximum bias in centrality statistics like the mean, even when some inputs are corrupted.
Designing such aggregators for high-dimensional data is challenging, but recent algorithms have shown promise in providing dimension-independent bias bounds.

Plain English Explanation

Neural networks, a type of machine learning model, are trained on large amounts of data. This training process often involves averaging many high-dimensional data vectors, such as images or text.

Poisoning attacks can manipulate some of these data vectors to skew or bias the averages used to train the model. This can force the model to learn specific patterns or fail to learn anything useful at all. It's like someone trying to sabotage the training of a model by subtly changing some of the training data.

To defend against these attacks, researchers have developed Byzantine robust aggregation techniques. These methods can mathematically bound the maximum bias in the centrality statistics, like the mean, even when some of the input data is corrupted. It's like having a system that can detect and remove the sabotaged data, ensuring the model is trained on clean, unbiased information.

Designing these robust aggregators is particularly challenging when dealing with high-dimensional data, like images or text. However, recent algorithms have shown the ability to provide strong, dimension-independent bounds on the bias. This means the defense can work well even as the complexity of the data increases, promising a limit on the power of poisoning attacks.

Technical Explanation

The paper presents a new attack called HIDRA that subverts the claims of dimension-independent bias bounds made by these recent robust aggregation defenses. HIDRA identifies a novel computational bottleneck that prior information-theoretic analysis had not considered.

The researchers' experimental evaluation shows that HIDRA can almost completely destroy the performance of models protected by these defenses, whereas existing attacks with the same goal fail to have much effect. This leaves the ongoing "arms race" between poisoning attacks and provable defenses wide open, as the authors' findings challenge the dimension-independent claims of the latest robust aggregation algorithms.

The paper builds on prior work in adversarial attacks and domain-specific defenses, highlighting the continued need for robust federated learning systems that can withstand a variety of poisoning threats.

Critical Analysis

The paper identifies an important limitation in the current state-of-the-art defenses against poisoning attacks, showing that the claimed dimension-independence of the bias bounds may not hold in practice. This is a significant finding that challenges the prevailing narrative and points to the need for further research in this area.

However, the paper does not provide a complete solution or alternative defense mechanism. The authors acknowledge that their attack leaves the "arms race" between attacks and defenses wide open, suggesting that more work is needed to develop truly robust aggregation techniques that can withstand a wide range of poisoning threats.

Additionally, the paper focuses primarily on the technical aspects of the attack and defense mechanisms, without delving deeply into the broader implications or societal impact of these issues. Future research could explore how these poisoning vulnerabilities might manifest in real-world applications and the potential consequences for users or organizations relying on these models.

Conclusion

This paper highlights a critical vulnerability in the latest defenses against poisoning attacks on neural network training, showing that the claimed dimension-independent bias bounds may not hold in practice. The authors' HIDRA attack almost completely destroys the performance of models protected by these defenses, leaving the ongoing arms race between attacks and provable defenses wide open.

This research underscores the continued need for robust and reliable machine learning systems that can withstand a variety of adversarial threats. As the complexity and importance of AI models continue to grow, addressing these vulnerabilities will be crucial to ensuring the trustworthiness and reliability of these technologies.

This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

🏷️

Attacking Byzantine Robust Aggregation in High Dimensions

Sarthak Choudhary, Aashish Kolluri, Prateek Saxena

Training modern neural networks or models typically requires averaging over a sample of high-dimensional vectors. Poisoning attacks can skew or bias the average vectors used to train the model, forcing the model to learn specific patterns or avoid learning anything useful. Byzantine robust aggregation is a principled algorithmic defense against such biasing. Robust aggregators can bound the maximum bias in computing centrality statistics, such as mean, even when some fraction of inputs are arbitrarily corrupted. Designing such aggregators is challenging when dealing with high dimensions. However, the first polynomial-time algorithms with strong theoretical bounds on the bias have recently been proposed. Their bounds are independent of the number of dimensions, promising a conceptual limit on the power of poisoning attacks in their ongoing arms race against defenses. In this paper, we show a new attack called HIDRA on practical realization of strong defenses which subverts their claim of dimension-independent bias. HIDRA highlights a novel computational bottleneck that has not been a concern of prior information-theoretic analysis. Our experimental evaluation shows that our attacks almost completely destroy the model performance, whereas existing attacks with the same goal fail to have much effect. Our findings leave the arms race between poisoning attacks and provable defenses wide open.

4/22/2024

Mean Aggregator Is More Robust Than Robust Aggregators Under Label Poisoning Attacks

Jie Peng, Weiyu Li, Qing Ling

Robustness to malicious attacks is of paramount importance for distributed learning. Existing works often consider the classical Byzantine attacks model, which assumes that some workers can send arbitrarily malicious messages to the server and disturb the aggregation steps of the distributed learning process. To defend against such worst-case Byzantine attacks, various robust aggregators have been proven effective and much superior to the often-used mean aggregator. In this paper, we show that robust aggregators are too conservative for a class of weak but practical malicious attacks, as known as label poisoning attacks, where the sample labels of some workers are poisoned. Surprisingly, we are able to show that the mean aggregator is more robust than the state-of-the-art robust aggregators in theory, given that the distributed data are sufficiently heterogeneous. In fact, the learning error of the mean aggregator is proven to be optimal in order. Experimental results corroborate our theoretical findings, demonstrating the superiority of the mean aggregator under label poisoning attacks.

4/23/2024

🛠️

On the Relevance of Byzantine Robust Optimization Against Data Poisoning

Sadegh Farhadkhani, Rachid Guerraoui, Nirupam Gupta, Rafael Pinot

The success of machine learning (ML) has been intimately linked with the availability of large amounts of data, typically collected from heterogeneous sources and processed on vast networks of computing devices (also called {em workers}). Beyond accuracy, the use of ML in critical domains such as healthcare and autonomous driving calls for robustness against {em data poisoning}and some {em faulty workers}. The problem of {em Byzantine ML} formalizes these robustness issues by considering a distributed ML environment in which workers (storing a portion of the global dataset) can deviate arbitrarily from the prescribed algorithm. Although the problem has attracted a lot of attention from a theoretical point of view, its practical importance for addressing realistic faults (where the behavior of any worker is locally constrained) remains unclear. It has been argued that the seemingly weaker threat model where only workers' local datasets get poisoned is more reasonable. We prove that, while tolerating a wider range of faulty behaviors, Byzantine ML yields solutions that are, in a precise sense, optimal even under the weaker data poisoning threat model. Then, we study a generic data poisoning model wherein some workers have {em fully-poisonous local data}, i.e., their datasets are entirely corruptible, and the remainders have {em partially-poisonous local data}, i.e., only a fraction of their local datasets is corruptible. We prove that Byzantine-robust schemes yield optimal solutions against both these forms of data poisoning, and that the former is more harmful when workers have {em heterogeneous} local data.

5/2/2024

👀

Advancing Hybrid Defense for Byzantine Attacks in Federated Learning

Kai Yue, Richeng Jin, Chau-Wai Wong, Huaiyu Dai

Federated learning (FL) enables multiple clients to collaboratively train a global model without sharing their local data. Recent studies have highlighted the vulnerability of FL to Byzantine attacks, where malicious clients send poisoned updates to degrade model performance. Notably, many attacks have been developed targeting specific aggregation rules, whereas various defense mechanisms have been designed for dedicated threat models. This paper studies the resilience of an attack-agnostic FL scenario, where the server lacks prior knowledge of both the attackers' strategies and the number of malicious clients involved. We first introduce a hybrid defense against state-of-the-art attacks. Our goal is to identify a general-purpose aggregation rule that performs well on average while also avoiding worst-case vulnerabilities. By adaptively selecting from available defenses, we demonstrate that the server remains robust even when confronted with a substantial proportion of poisoned updates. To better understand this resilience, we then assess the attackers' capability using a proxy called client heterogeneity. We also emphasize that the existing FL defenses should not be regarded as secure, as demonstrated through the newly proposed Trapsetter attack. The proposed attack outperforms other state-of-the-art attacks by further reducing the model test accuracy by 8-10%. Our findings highlight the ongoing need for the development of Byzantine-resilient aggregation algorithms in FL.

9/11/2024