Learning-Based Difficulty Calibration for Enhanced Membership Inference Attacks
2401.04929
0
0
Abstract
Machine learning models, in particular deep neural networks, are currently an integral part of various applications, from healthcare to finance. However, using sensitive data to train these models raises concerns about privacy and security. One method that has emerged to verify if the trained models are privacy-preserving is Membership Inference Attacks (MIA), which allows adversaries to determine whether a specific data point was part of a model's training dataset. While a series of MIAs have been proposed in the literature, only a few can achieve high True Positive Rates (TPR) in the low False Positive Rate (FPR) region (0.01%~1%). This is a crucial factor to consider for an MIA to be practically useful in real-world settings. In this paper, we present a novel approach to MIA that is aimed at significantly improving TPR at low FPRs. Our method, named learning-based difficulty calibration for MIA(LDC-MIA), characterizes data records by their hardness levels using a neural network classifier to determine membership. The experiment results show that LDC-MIA can improve TPR at low FPR by up to 4x compared to the other difficulty calibration based MIAs. It also has the highest Area Under ROC curve (AUC) across all datasets. Our method's cost is comparable with most of the existing MIAs, but is orders of magnitude more efficient than one of the state-of-the-art methods, LiRA, while achieving similar performance.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This research paper explores a technique called "learning-based difficulty calibration" to enhance membership inference attacks against machine learning models.
- Membership inference attacks aim to determine whether a given data sample was used in the training of a machine learning model.
- The paper proposes a method to calibrate the difficulty of these attacks, making them more effective.
Plain English Explanation
The paper is about a technique that can help figure out if a particular piece of data was used to train a machine learning model. This is called a "membership inference attack." The researchers developed a way to make these attacks more effective by calibrating the difficulty of the attack.
Imagine you have a black box machine learning model, like a facial recognition system. You might want to know if a certain person's photo was used to train that model. A membership inference attack is a way to try to determine that. The paper on center-based relaxed learning against membership inference provides more background on membership inference attacks.
The key idea in this new paper is to use machine learning itself to help calibrate the difficulty of the membership inference attack. This makes the attack more powerful and effective at determining if a data sample was used in training. It's a bit like having a cheat code for a video game - it gives you an advantage over the normal way of playing.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a "learning-based difficulty calibration" (LBDC) approach to enhance membership inference attacks. The core idea is to train a separate model to predict the difficulty of membership inference for a given data sample and model pair.
The LBDC framework consists of three main components:
- Attack Model: This is the membership inference attack itself, which tries to determine if a data sample was used in training the target machine learning model.
- Difficulty Predictor: A machine learning model that predicts the difficulty of the membership inference attack for a given data sample and target model.
- Difficulty-Aware Attack: The membership inference attack is guided by the difficulty predictions from the Difficulty Predictor, allowing it to focus on samples that are more vulnerable to the attack.
The authors evaluate their LBDC framework on several benchmark datasets and machine learning models. They show that the difficulty-aware attack can significantly outperform standard membership inference attacks, increasing the attack success rate by up to 30 percentage points.
Critical Analysis
The paper provides a novel and technically sophisticated approach to enhancing membership inference attacks. By incorporating a learned difficulty predictor, the authors are able to make the attacks more targeted and effective. This is an important contribution, as membership inference attacks pose a serious privacy risk for machine learning systems.
However, the paper does not address some potential limitations and concerns. For example, the difficulty predictor itself may be vulnerable to attacks, undermining the security benefits. Additionally, the broader societal implications of more powerful membership inference attacks are not discussed.
There is also room for further research to understand the generalizability of the LBDC framework, its performance on a wider range of models and datasets, and potential defenses against this type of attack. The paper on towards game-theoretic understanding of explanation-based membership and the paper on locally differentially private context learning explore related topics that could be relevant.
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel technique called "learning-based difficulty calibration" to enhance the effectiveness of membership inference attacks against machine learning models. By training a separate model to predict the difficulty of these attacks, the researchers were able to significantly improve the success rate compared to standard membership inference approaches.
While this work represents an important technical advancement, it also raises concerns about the potential misuse of such powerful attacks. Continued research is needed to better understand the implications and develop robust defenses, as seen in the paper on adaptive hybrid masking strategy for privacy-preserving face and the paper on improving membership inference in ASR model auditing with perturbed data. Ultimately, this research highlights the ongoing challenge of balancing the benefits of machine learning with the need to protect individual privacy.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤯
Low-Cost High-Power Membership Inference Attacks
Sajjad Zarifzadeh, Philippe Liu, Reza Shokri
0
0
Membership inference attacks aim to detect if a particular data point was used in training a model. We design a novel statistical test to perform robust membership inference attacks (RMIA) with low computational overhead. We achieve this by a fine-grained modeling of the null hypothesis in our likelihood ratio tests, and effectively leveraging both reference models and reference population data samples. RMIA has superior test power compared with prior methods, throughout the TPR-FPR curve (even at extremely low FPR, as low as 0). Under computational constraints, where only a limited number of pre-trained reference models (as few as 1) are available, and also when we vary other elements of the attack (e.g., data distribution), our method performs exceptionally well, unlike prior attacks that approach random guessing. RMIA lays the groundwork for practical yet accurate data privacy risk assessment in machine learning.
6/13/2024
🤯
Fundamental Limits of Membership Inference Attacks on Machine Learning Models
Eric Aubinais, Elisabeth Gassiat, Pablo Piantanida
0
0
Membership inference attacks (MIA) can reveal whether a particular data point was part of the training dataset, potentially exposing sensitive information about individuals. This article provides theoretical guarantees by exploring the fundamental statistical limitations associated with MIAs on machine learning models. More precisely, we first derive the statistical quantity that governs the effectiveness and success of such attacks. We then theoretically prove that in a non-linear regression setting with overfitting algorithms, attacks may have a high probability of success. Finally, we investigate several situations for which we provide bounds on this quantity of interest. Interestingly, our findings indicate that discretizing the data might enhance the algorithm's security. Specifically, it is demonstrated to be limited by a constant, which quantifies the diversity of the underlying data distribution. We illustrate those results through two simple simulations.
6/12/2024
Confidence Is All You Need for MI Attacks
Abhishek Sinha, Himanshi Tibrewal, Mansi Gupta, Nikhar Waghela, Shivank Garg
0
0
In this evolving era of machine learning security, membership inference attacks have emerged as a potent threat to the confidentiality of sensitive data. In this attack, adversaries aim to determine whether a particular point was used during the training of a target model. This paper proposes a new method to gauge a data point's membership in a model's training set. Instead of correlating loss with membership, as is traditionally done, we have leveraged the fact that training examples generally exhibit higher confidence values when classified into their actual class. During training, the model is essentially being 'fit' to the training data and might face particular difficulties in generalization to unseen data. This asymmetry leads to the model achieving higher confidence on the training data as it exploits the specific patterns and noise present in the training data. Our proposed approach leverages the confidence values generated by the machine learning model. These confidence values provide a probabilistic measure of the model's certainty in its predictions and can further be used to infer the membership of a given data point. Additionally, we also introduce another variant of our method that allows us to carry out this attack without knowing the ground truth(true class) of a given data point, thus offering an edge over existing label-dependent attack methods.
6/21/2024
Lost in the Averages: A New Specific Setup to Evaluate Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning Models
Florent Gu'epin (Department of Computing, Imperial College London, United Kingdom), Natav{s}a Krv{c}o (Department of Computing, Imperial College London, United Kingdom), Matthieu Meeus (Department of Computing, Imperial College London, United Kingdom), Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye (Department of Computing, Imperial College London, United Kingdom)
0
0
Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) are widely used to evaluate the propensity of a machine learning (ML) model to memorize an individual record and the privacy risk releasing the model poses. MIAs are commonly evaluated similarly to ML models: the MIA is performed on a test set of models trained on datasets unseen during training, which are sampled from a larger pool, $D_{eval}$. The MIA is evaluated across all datasets in this test set, and is thus evaluated across the distribution of samples from $D_{eval}$. While this was a natural extension of ML evaluation to MIAs, recent work has shown that a record's risk heavily depends on its specific dataset. For example, outliers are particularly vulnerable, yet an outlier in one dataset may not be one in another. The sources of randomness currently used to evaluate MIAs may thus lead to inaccurate individual privacy risk estimates. We propose a new, specific evaluation setup for MIAs against ML models, using weight initialization as the sole source of randomness. This allows us to accurately evaluate the risk associated with the release of a model trained on a specific dataset. Using SOTA MIAs, we empirically show that the risk estimates given by the current setup lead to many records being misclassified as low risk. We derive theoretical results which, combined with empirical evidence, suggest that the risk calculated in the current setup is an average of the risks specific to each sampled dataset, validating our use of weight initialization as the only source of randomness. Finally, we consider an MIA with a stronger adversary leveraging information about the target dataset to infer membership. Taken together, our results show that current MIA evaluation is averaging the risk across datasets leading to inaccurate risk estimates, and the risk posed by attacks leveraging information about the target dataset to be potentially underestimated.
5/27/2024