arXiv subjects

Anna Yoo Jeong Ha

Publications and source records attributed to Anna Yoo Jeong Ha.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Mitigating Private Data Leakage in LLMs with Whiteout

Modern large language models (LLMs) are trained on massive, largely unfiltered datasets, including content scraped from nearly every accessible website and user inputs. As a result, LLMs often memorize and reproduce personally sensitive information (PSI) such as birth dates, phone numbers, and home addresses. This leads to significant privacy risks, particularly for high-profile individuals such as executives, politicians, and judges. Existing mitigations largely rely on machine unlearning. However, these methods often remove more information than needed, degrade model utility and safety, and are highly vulnerable to attacks. This paper presents Whiteout, a practical tool that, upon requests by individuals, prevents LLMs from regurgitating their genuine PSIs, by overwriting them using precise and carefully designed obfuscation samples. We evaluate Whiteout on modern LLMs of varying sizes and makers, including a widely-used OpenAI model. Results show that Whiteout effectively prevents disclosure of the targeted PSIs, has negligible impact on model utility and safety, and outperforms existing alternatives. We also test Whiteout against a wide range of countermeasures, from black-box attacks like jailbreaking to white-box adaptive attacks like relearning and quantization. Finally, we conclude with a discussion on the security and ethical implications of Whiteout.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

On the Feasibility of Poisoning Text-to-Image AI Models via Adversarial Mislabeling

Today's text-to-image generative models are trained on millions of images sourced from the Internet, each paired with a detailed caption produced by Vision-Language Models (VLMs). This part of the training pipeline is critical for supplying the models with large volumes of high-quality image-caption pairs during training. However, recent work suggests that VLMs are vulnerable to stealthy adversarial attacks, where adversarial perturbations are added to images to mislead the VLMs into producing incorrect captions. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of adversarial mislabeling attacks on VLMs as a mechanism to poisoning training pipelines for text-to-image models. Our experiments demonstrate that VLMs are highly vulnerable to adversarial perturbations, allowing attackers to produce benign-looking images that are consistently miscaptioned by the VLM models. This has the effect of injecting strong "dirty-label" poison samples into the training pipeline for text-to-image models, successfully altering their behavior with a small number of poisoned samples. We find that while potential defenses can be effective, they can be targeted and circumvented by adaptive attackers. This suggests a cat-and-mouse game that is likely to reduce the quality of training data and increase the cost of text-to-image model development. Finally, we demonstrate the real-world effectiveness of these attacks, achieving high attack success (over 73%) even in black-box scenarios against commercial VLMs (Google Vertex AI and Microsoft Azure).

cs.CR↗

arXiv2024

Organic or Diffused: Can We Distinguish Human Art from AI-generated Images?

The advent of generative AI images has completely disrupted the art world. Distinguishing AI generated images from human art is a challenging problem whose impact is growing over time. A failure to address this problem allows bad actors to defraud individuals paying a premium for human art and companies whose stated policies forbid AI imagery. It is also critical for content owners to establish copyright, and for model trainers interested in curating training data in order to avoid potential model collapse. There are several different approaches to distinguishing human art from AI images, including classifiers trained by supervised learning, research tools targeting diffusion models, and identification by professional artists using their knowledge of artistic techniques. In this paper, we seek to understand how well these approaches can perform against today's modern generative models in both benign and adversarial settings. We curate real human art across 7 styles, generate matching images from 5 generative models, and apply 8 detectors (5 automated detectors and 3 different human groups including 180 crowdworkers, 4000+ professional artists, and 13 expert artists experienced at detecting AI). Both Hive and expert artists do very well, but make mistakes in different ways (Hive is weaker against adversarial perturbations while Expert artists produce higher false positives). We believe these weaknesses will remain as models continue to evolve, and use our data to demonstrate why a combined team of human and automated detectors provides the best combination of accuracy and robustness.

cs.CV↗