Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Matthew Jagielski

Publications and source records attributed to Matthew Jagielski.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
arXiv2023

Backdoor Attacks for In-Context Learning with Language Models

Because state-of-the-art language models are expensive to train, most practitioners must make use of one of the few publicly available language models or language model APIs. This consolidation of trust increases the potency of backdoor attacks, where an adversary tampers with a machine learning model in order to make it perform some malicious behavior on inputs that contain a predefined backdoor trigger. We show that the in-context learning ability of large language models significantly complicates the question of developing backdoor attacks, as a successful backdoor must work against various prompting strategies and should not affect the model's general purpose capabilities. We design a new attack for eliciting targeted misclassification when language models are prompted to perform a particular target task and demonstrate the feasibility of this attack by backdooring multiple large language models ranging in size from 1.3 billion to 6 billion parameters. Finally we study defenses to mitigate the potential harms of our attack: for example, while in the white-box setting we show that fine-tuning models for as few as 500 steps suffices to remove the backdoor behavior, in the black-box setting we are unable to develop a successful defense that relies on prompt engineering alone.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2023

SNAP: Efficient Extraction of Private Properties with Poisoning

Property inference attacks allow an adversary to extract global properties of the training dataset from a machine learning model. Such attacks have privacy implications for data owners sharing their datasets to train machine learning models. Several existing approaches for property inference attacks against deep neural networks have been proposed, but they all rely on the attacker training a large number of shadow models, which induces a large computational overhead. In this paper, we consider the setting of property inference attacks in which the attacker can poison a subset of the training dataset and query the trained target model. Motivated by our theoretical analysis of model confidences under poisoning, we design an efficient property inference attack, SNAP, which obtains higher attack success and requires lower amounts of poisoning than the state-of-the-art poisoning-based property inference attack by Mahloujifar et al. For example, on the Census dataset, SNAP achieves 34% higher success rate than Mahloujifar et al. while being 56.5x faster. We also extend our attack to infer whether a certain property was present at all during training and estimate the exact proportion of a property of interest efficiently. We evaluate our attack on several properties of varying proportions from four datasets and demonstrate SNAP's generality and effectiveness. An open-source implementation of SNAP can be found at https://github.com/johnmath/snap-sp23.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

A Note On Interpreting Canary Exposure

Canary exposure, introduced in Carlini et al. is frequently used to empirically evaluate, or audit, the privacy of machine learning model training. The goal of this note is to provide some intuition on how to interpret canary exposure, including by relating it to membership inference attacks and differential privacy.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2023

Privacy Auditing with One (1) Training Run

We propose a scheme for auditing differentially private machine learning systems with a single training run. This exploits the parallelism of being able to add or remove multiple training examples independently. We analyze this using the connection between differential privacy and statistical generalization, which avoids the cost of group privacy. Our auditing scheme requires minimal assumptions about the algorithm and can be applied in the black-box or white-box setting.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Measuring Forgetting of Memorized Training Examples

Machine learning models exhibit two seemingly contradictory phenomena: training data memorization, and various forms of forgetting. In memorization, models overfit specific training examples and become susceptible to privacy attacks. In forgetting, examples which appeared early in training are forgotten by the end. In this work, we connect these phenomena. We propose a technique to measure to what extent models "forget" the specifics of training examples, becoming less susceptible to privacy attacks on examples they have not seen recently. We show that, while non-convex models can memorize data forever in the worst-case, standard image, speech, and language models empirically do forget examples over time. We identify nondeterminism as a potential explanation, showing that deterministically trained models do not forget. Our results suggest that examples seen early when training with extremely large datasets - for instance those examples used to pre-train a model - may observe privacy benefits at the expense of examples seen later.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Quantifying Memorization Across Neural Language Models

Large language models (LMs) have been shown to memorize parts of their training data, and when prompted appropriately, they will emit the memorized training data verbatim. This is undesirable because memorization violates privacy (exposing user data), degrades utility (repeated easy-to-memorize text is often low quality), and hurts fairness (some texts are memorized over others). We describe three log-linear relationships that quantify the degree to which LMs emit memorized training data. Memorization significantly grows as we increase (1) the capacity of a model, (2) the number of times an example has been duplicated, and (3) the number of tokens of context used to prompt the model. Surprisingly, we find the situation becomes more complicated when generalizing these results across model families. On the whole, we find that memorization in LMs is more prevalent than previously believed and will likely get worse as models continues to scale, at least without active mitigations.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Students Parrot Their Teachers: Membership Inference on Model Distillation

Model distillation is frequently proposed as a technique to reduce the privacy leakage of machine learning. These empirical privacy defenses rely on the intuition that distilled ``student'' models protect the privacy of training data, as they only interact with this data indirectly through a ``teacher'' model. In this work, we design membership inference attacks to systematically study the privacy provided by knowledge distillation to both the teacher and student training sets. Our new attacks show that distillation alone provides only limited privacy across a number of domains. We explain the success of our attacks on distillation by showing that membership inference attacks on a private dataset can succeed even if the target model is *never* queried on any actual training points, but only on inputs whose predictions are highly influenced by training data. Finally, we show that our attacks are strongest when student and teacher sets are similar, or when the attacker can poison the teacher set.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2023

Randomness in ML Defenses Helps Persistent Attackers and Hinders Evaluators

It is becoming increasingly imperative to design robust ML defenses. However, recent work has found that many defenses that initially resist state-of-the-art attacks can be broken by an adaptive adversary. In this work we take steps to simplify the design of defenses and argue that white-box defenses should eschew randomness when possible. We begin by illustrating a new issue with the deployment of randomized defenses that reduces their security compared to their deterministic counterparts. We then provide evidence that making defenses deterministic simplifies robustness evaluation, without reducing the effectiveness of a truly robust defense. Finally, we introduce a new defense evaluation framework that leverages a defense's deterministic nature to better evaluate its adversarial robustness.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Tight Auditing of Differentially Private Machine Learning

Auditing mechanisms for differential privacy use probabilistic means to empirically estimate the privacy level of an algorithm. For private machine learning, existing auditing mechanisms are tight: the empirical privacy estimate (nearly) matches the algorithm's provable privacy guarantee. But these auditing techniques suffer from two limitations. First, they only give tight estimates under implausible worst-case assumptions (e.g., a fully adversarial dataset). Second, they require thousands or millions of training runs to produce non-trivial statistical estimates of the privacy leakage. This work addresses both issues. We design an improved auditing scheme that yields tight privacy estimates for natural (not adversarially crafted) datasets -- if the adversary can see all model updates during training. Prior auditing works rely on the same assumption, which is permitted under the standard differential privacy threat model. This threat model is also applicable, e.g., in federated learning settings. Moreover, our auditing scheme requires only two training runs (instead of thousands) to produce tight privacy estimates, by adapting recent advances in tight composition theorems for differential privacy. We demonstrate the utility of our improved auditing schemes by surfacing implementation bugs in private machine learning code that eluded prior auditing techniques.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2023

Extracting Training Data from Diffusion Models

Image diffusion models such as DALL-E 2, Imagen, and Stable Diffusion have attracted significant attention due to their ability to generate high-quality synthetic images. In this work, we show that diffusion models memorize individual images from their training data and emit them at generation time. With a generate-and-filter pipeline, we extract over a thousand training examples from state-of-the-art models, ranging from photographs of individual people to trademarked company logos. We also train hundreds of diffusion models in various settings to analyze how different modeling and data decisions affect privacy. Overall, our results show that diffusion models are much less private than prior generative models such as GANs, and that mitigating these vulnerabilities may require new advances in privacy-preserving training.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2022

Truth Serum: Poisoning Machine Learning Models to Reveal Their Secrets

We introduce a new class of attacks on machine learning models. We show that an adversary who can poison a training dataset can cause models trained on this dataset to leak significant private details of training points belonging to other parties. Our active inference attacks connect two independent lines of work targeting the integrity and privacy of machine learning training data. Our attacks are effective across membership inference, attribute inference, and data extraction. For example, our targeted attacks can poison <0.1% of the training dataset to boost the performance of inference attacks by 1 to 2 orders of magnitude. Further, an adversary who controls a significant fraction of the training data (e.g., 50%) can launch untargeted attacks that enable 8x more precise inference on all other users' otherwise-private data points. Our results cast doubts on the relevance of cryptographic privacy guarantees in multiparty computation protocols for machine learning, if parties can arbitrarily select their share of training data.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2022

SafeNet: The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Ensembles in Private Collaborative Learning

Secure multiparty computation (MPC) has been proposed to allow multiple mutually distrustful data owners to jointly train machine learning (ML) models on their combined data. However, by design, MPC protocols faithfully compute the training functionality, which the adversarial ML community has shown to leak private information and can be tampered with in poisoning attacks. In this work, we argue that model ensembles, implemented in our framework called SafeNet, are a highly MPC-amenable way to avoid many adversarial ML attacks. The natural partitioning of data amongst owners in MPC training allows this approach to be highly scalable at training time, provide provable protection from poisoning attacks, and provably defense against a number of privacy attacks. We demonstrate SafeNet's efficiency, accuracy, and resilience to poisoning on several machine learning datasets and models trained in end-to-end and transfer learning scenarios. For instance, SafeNet reduces backdoor attack success significantly, while achieving $39\times$ faster training and $36 \times$ less communication than the four-party MPC framework of Dalskov et al. Our experiments show that ensembling retains these benefits even in many non-iid settings. The simplicity, cheap setup, and robustness properties of ensembling make it a strong first choice for training ML models privately in MPC.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2022

Network-Level Adversaries in Federated Learning

Federated learning is a popular strategy for training models on distributed, sensitive data, while preserving data privacy. Prior work identified a range of security threats on federated learning protocols that poison the data or the model. However, federated learning is a networked system where the communication between clients and server plays a critical role for the learning task performance. We highlight how communication introduces another vulnerability surface in federated learning and study the impact of network-level adversaries on training federated learning models. We show that attackers dropping the network traffic from carefully selected clients can significantly decrease model accuracy on a target population. Moreover, we show that a coordinated poisoning campaign from a few clients can amplify the dropping attacks. Finally, we develop a server-side defense which mitigates the impact of our attacks by identifying and up-sampling clients likely to positively contribute towards target accuracy. We comprehensively evaluate our attacks and defenses on three datasets, assuming encrypted communication channels and attackers with partial visibility of the network.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2022

The Privacy Onion Effect: Memorization is Relative

Machine learning models trained on private datasets have been shown to leak their private data. While recent work has found that the average data point is rarely leaked, the outlier samples are frequently subject to memorization and, consequently, privacy leakage. We demonstrate and analyse an Onion Effect of memorization: removing the "layer" of outlier points that are most vulnerable to a privacy attack exposes a new layer of previously-safe points to the same attack. We perform several experiments to study this effect, and understand why it occurs. The existence of this effect has various consequences. For example, it suggests that proposals to defend against memorization without training with rigorous privacy guarantees are unlikely to be effective. Further, it suggests that privacy-enhancing technologies such as machine unlearning could actually harm the privacy of other users.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2022

How to Combine Membership-Inference Attacks on Multiple Updated Models

A large body of research has shown that machine learning models are vulnerable to membership inference (MI) attacks that violate the privacy of the participants in the training data. Most MI research focuses on the case of a single standalone model, while production machine-learning platforms often update models over time, on data that often shifts in distribution, giving the attacker more information. This paper proposes new attacks that take advantage of one or more model updates to improve MI. A key part of our approach is to leverage rich information from standalone MI attacks mounted separately against the original and updated models, and to combine this information in specific ways to improve attack effectiveness. We propose a set of combination functions and tuning methods for each, and present both analytical and quantitative justification for various options. Our results on four public datasets show that our attacks are effective at using update information to give the adversary a significant advantage over attacks on standalone models, but also compared to a prior MI attack that takes advantage of model updates in a related machine-unlearning setting. We perform the first measurements of the impact of distribution shift on MI attacks with model updates, and show that a more drastic distribution shift results in significantly higher MI risk than a gradual shift. Our code is available at https://www.github.com/stanleykywu/model-updates.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2022

Subverting Fair Image Search with Generative Adversarial Perturbations

In this work we explore the intersection fairness and robustness in the context of ranking: when a ranking model has been calibrated to achieve some definition of fairness, is it possible for an external adversary to make the ranking model behave unfairly without having access to the model or training data? To investigate this question, we present a case study in which we develop and then attack a state-of-the-art, fairness-aware image search engine using images that have been maliciously modified using a Generative Adversarial Perturbation (GAP) model. These perturbations attempt to cause the fair re-ranking algorithm to unfairly boost the rank of images containing people from an adversary-selected subpopulation. We present results from extensive experiments demonstrating that our attacks can successfully confer significant unfair advantage to people from the majority class relative to fairly-ranked baseline search results. We demonstrate that our attacks are robust across a number of variables, that they have close to zero impact on the relevance of search results, and that they succeed under a strict threat model. Our findings highlight the danger of deploying fair machine learning algorithms in-the-wild when (1) the data necessary to achieve fairness may be adversarially manipulated, and (2) the models themselves are not robust against attacks.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2022

Debugging Differential Privacy: A Case Study for Privacy Auditing

Differential Privacy can provide provable privacy guarantees for training data in machine learning. However, the presence of proofs does not preclude the presence of errors. Inspired by recent advances in auditing which have been used for estimating lower bounds on differentially private algorithms, here we show that auditing can also be used to find flaws in (purportedly) differentially private schemes. In this case study, we audit a recent open source implementation of a differentially private deep learning algorithm and find, with 99.99999999% confidence, that the implementation does not satisfy the claimed differential privacy guarantee.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2021

Manipulating Machine Learning: Poisoning Attacks and Countermeasures for Regression Learning

As machine learning becomes widely used for automated decisions, attackers have strong incentives to manipulate the results and models generated by machine learning algorithms. In this paper, we perform the first systematic study of poisoning attacks and their countermeasures for linear regression models. In poisoning attacks, attackers deliberately influence the training data to manipulate the results of a predictive model. We propose a theoretically-grounded optimization framework specifically designed for linear regression and demonstrate its effectiveness on a range of datasets and models. We also introduce a fast statistical attack that requires limited knowledge of the training process. Finally, we design a new principled defense method that is highly resilient against all poisoning attacks. We provide formal guarantees about its convergence and an upper bound on the effect of poisoning attacks when the defense is deployed. We evaluate extensively our attacks and defenses on three realistic datasets from health care, loan assessment, and real estate domains.

cs.CR↗