Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye

Publications and source records attributed to Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
arXiv2026

Claudini: Autoresearch Discovers State-of-the-Art Adversarial Attack Algorithms for LLMs

We show that AI agents are capable of discovering novel algorithms for adversarial attacks against LLMs, advancing the state of the art on white-box jailbreaking and prompt injection evaluations. We deploy frontier agents, such as Claude Code and Codex, in an autoresearch loop with access to a library of 30+ prior methods and an evaluation script with a fixed compute budget. We show this pipeline to be effective in jailbreaking OpenAI's GPT-OSS-Safeguard-20B and in prompt injections against Meta-SecAlign-70B, an adversarially robust model. For GPT-OSS-Safeguard, the best agent-discovered method achieves up to 80\% attack success rate on CBRN queries, compared to <50\% for existing methods. For SecAlign, it achieves 100\% ASR, while the best prior automated methods only achieve 82\%. Notably, in our setting, attack methods are developed on unrelated surrogate models for a pure random-target token-forcing task, yet generalize directly to prompt injection on the adversarially trained model. Finally, we trace the lineage of methods developed during autoresearch, characterizing the agents' strategies and failure modes. Adversarial ML has long held that defenses must be evaluated against attacks tailored to them; autoresearch automates this principle, and we argue it should be the minimum bar for defense evaluation going forward.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

RAT-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Text Anonymization

Data containing personal information is increasingly used to train, fine-tune, or query Large Language Models (LLMs). Text is typically scrubbed of identifying information prior to use, often with tools such as Microsoft's Presidio or Anthropic's PII purifier. These tools have traditionally been evaluated on their ability to remove specific identifiers (e.g., names), yet their effectiveness at preventing re-identification remains unclear. We introduce RAT-Bench, a comprehensive benchmark for text anonymization tools based on re-identification risk. Using U.S. demographic statistics, we generate synthetic text containing various direct and indirect identifiers across domains, languages, and difficulty levels. We evaluate a range of NER- and LLM-based text anonymization tools and, based on the attributes an LLM-based attacker is able to correctly infer from the anonymized text, we report the risk of re-identification in the U.S. population, while properly accounting for the disparate impact of identifiers. We find that, while capabilities vary widely, even the best tools are far from perfect in particular when direct identifiers are not written in standard ways and when indirect identifiers enable re-identification. Overall we find LLM-based anonymizers, including new iterative anonymizers, to provide a better privacy-utility trade-off albeit at a higher computational cost. Importantly, we also find them to work well across languages. We conclude with recommendations for future anonymization tools and will release the benchmark and encourage community efforts to expand it, in particular to other geographies.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

Exploring the limits of strong membership inference attacks on large language models

State-of-the-art membership inference attacks (MIAs) typically require training many reference models, making it difficult to scale these attacks to large pre-trained language models (LLMs). As a result, prior research has either relied on weaker attacks that avoid training references (e.g., fine-tuning attacks), or on stronger attacks applied to small models and datasets. However, weaker attacks have been shown to be brittle and insights from strong attacks in simplified settings do not translate to today's LLMs. These challenges prompt an important question: are the limitations observed in prior work due to attack design choices, or are MIAs fundamentally ineffective on LLMs? We address this question by scaling LiRA--one of the strongest MIAs--to GPT-2 architectures ranging from 10M to 1B parameters, training references on over 20B tokens from the C4 dataset. Our results advance the understanding of MIAs on LLMs in four key ways. While (1) strong MIAs can succeed on pre-trained LLMs, (2) their effectiveness, remains limited (e.g., AUC<0.7) in practical settings. (3) Even when strong MIAs achieve better-than-random AUC, aggregate metrics can conceal substantial per-sample MIA decision instability: due to training randomness, many decisions are so unstable that they are statistically indistinguishable from a coin flip. Finally, (4) the relationship between MIA success and related LLM privacy metrics is not as straightforward as prior work has suggested.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2025

The Tail Tells All: Estimating Model-Level Membership Inference Vulnerability Without Reference Models

Membership inference attacks (MIAs) have emerged as the standard tool for evaluating the privacy risks of AI models. However, state-of-the-art attacks require training numerous, often computationally expensive, reference models, limiting their practicality. We present a novel approach for estimating model-level vulnerability, the TPR at low FPR, to membership inference attacks without requiring reference models. Empirical analysis shows loss distributions to be asymmetric and heavy-tailed and suggests that most points at risk from MIAs have moved from the tail (high-loss region) to the head (low-loss region) of the distribution after training. We leverage this insight to propose a method to estimate model-level vulnerability from the training and testing distribution alone: using the absence of outliers from the high-loss region as a predictor of the risk. We evaluate our method, the TNR of a simple loss attack, across a wide range of architectures and datasets and show it to accurately estimate model-level vulnerability to the SOTA MIA attack (LiRA). We also show our method to outperform both low-cost (few reference models) attacks such as RMIA and other measures of distribution difference. We finally evaluate the use of non-linear functions to evaluate risk and show the approach to be promising to evaluate the risk in large-language models.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Lost in the Averages: A New Specific Setup to Evaluate Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning Models

Synthetic data generators and machine learning models can memorize their training data, posing privacy concerns. Membership inference attacks (MIAs) are a standard method of estimating the privacy risk of these systems. The risk of individual records is typically computed by evaluating MIAs in a record-specific privacy game. We analyze the record-specific privacy game commonly used for evaluating attackers under realistic assumptions (the \textit{traditional} game) -- particularly for synthetic tabular data -- and show that it averages a record's privacy risk across datasets. We show this implicitly assumes the dataset a record is part of has no impact on the record's risk, providing a misleading risk estimate when a specific model or synthetic dataset is released. Instead, we propose a novel use of the leave-one-out game, used in existing work exclusively to audit differential privacy guarantees, and call this the \textit{model-seeded} game. We formalize it and show that it provides an accurate estimate of the privacy risk posed by a given adversary for a record in its specific dataset. We instantiate and evaluate the state-of-the-art MIA for synthetic data generators in the traditional and model-seeded privacy games, and show across multiple datasets and models that the two privacy games indeed result in different risk scores, with up to 94\% of high-risk records being overlooked by the traditional game. We further show that records in smaller datasets and models not protected by strong differential privacy guarantees tend to have a larger gap between risk estimates. Taken together, our results show that the model-seeded setup yields a risk estimate specific to a certain model or synthetic dataset released and in line with the standard notion of privacy leakage from prior work, meaningfully different from the dataset-averaged risk provided by the traditional privacy game.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Checkpoint-GCG: Auditing and Attacking Fine-Tuning-Based Prompt Injection Defenses

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications ranging from chatbots to agentic systems, where they are expected to process untrusted data and follow trusted instructions. Failure to distinguish between the two poses significant security risks, exploited by prompt injection attacks, which inject malicious instructions into the data to control model outputs. Model-level defenses have been proposed to mitigate prompt injection attacks. These defenses fine-tune LLMs to ignore injected instructions in untrusted data. We introduce Checkpoint-GCG, a white-box attack against fine-tuning-based defenses. Checkpoint-GCG enhances the Greedy Coordinate Gradient (GCG) attack by leveraging intermediate model checkpoints produced during fine-tuning to initialize GCG, with each checkpoint acting as a stepping stone for the next one to continuously improve attacks. First, we instantiate Checkpoint-GCG to evaluate the robustness of the state-of-the-art defenses in an auditing setup, assuming both (a) full knowledge of the model input and (b) access to intermediate model checkpoints. We show Checkpoint-GCG to achieve up to $96\%$ attack success rate (ASR) against the strongest defense. Second, we relax the first assumption by searching for a universal suffix that would work on unseen inputs, and obtain up to $89.9\%$ ASR against the strongest defense. Finally, we relax both assumptions by searching for a universal suffix that would transfer to similar black-box models and defenses, achieving an ASR of $63.9\%$ against a newly released defended model from Meta.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2025

Counterfactual Influence as a Distributional Quantity

Machine learning models are known to memorize samples from their training data, raising concerns around privacy and generalization. Counterfactual self-influence is a popular metric to study memorization, quantifying how the model's prediction for a sample changes depending on the sample's inclusion in the training dataset. However, recent work has shown memorization to be affected by factors beyond self-influence, with other training samples, in particular (near-)duplicates, having a large impact. We here study memorization treating counterfactual influence as a distributional quantity, taking into account how all training samples influence how a sample is memorized. For a small language model, we compute the full influence distribution of training samples on each other and analyze its properties. We find that solely looking at self-influence can severely underestimate tangible risks associated with memorization: the presence of (near-)duplicates seriously reduces self-influence, while we find these samples to be (near-)extractable. We observe similar patterns for image classification, where simply looking at the influence distributions reveals the presence of near-duplicates in CIFAR-10. Our findings highlight that memorization stems from complex interactions across training data and is better captured by the full influence distribution than by self-influence alone.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Free Record-Level Privacy Risk Evaluation Through Artifact-Based Methods

Membership inference attacks (MIAs) are widely used to empirically assess privacy risks in machine learning models, both providing model-level vulnerability metrics and identifying the most vulnerable training samples. State-of-the-art methods, however, require training hundreds of shadow models with the same architecture as the target model. This makes the computational cost of assessing the privacy of models prohibitive for many practical applications, particularly when used iteratively as part of the model development process and for large models. We propose a novel approach for identifying the training samples most vulnerable to membership inference attacks by analyzing artifacts naturally available during the training process. Our method, Loss Trace Interquartile Range (LT-IQR), analyzes per-sample loss trajectories collected during model training to identify high-risk samples without requiring any additional model training. Through experiments on standard benchmarks, we demonstrate that LT-IQR achieves 92% precision@k=1% in identifying the samples most vulnerable to state-of-the-art MIAs. This result holds across datasets and model architectures with LT-IQR outperforming both traditional vulnerability metrics, such as loss, and lightweight MIAs using few shadow models. We also show LT-IQR to accurately identify points vulnerable to multiple MIA methods and perform ablation studies. We believe LT-IQR enables model developers to identify vulnerable training samples, for free, as part of the model development process. Our results emphasize the potential of artifact-based methods to efficiently evaluate privacy risks.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

Certification for Differentially Private Prediction in Gradient-Based Training

We study private prediction where differential privacy is achieved by adding noise to the outputs of a non-private model. Existing methods rely on noise proportional to the global sensitivity of the model, often resulting in sub-optimal privacy-utility trade-offs compared to private training. We introduce a novel approach for computing dataset-specific upper bounds on prediction sensitivity by leveraging convex relaxation and bound propagation techniques. By combining these bounds with the smooth sensitivity mechanism, we significantly improve the privacy analysis of private prediction compared to global sensitivity-based approaches. Experimental results across real-world datasets in medical image classification and natural language processing demonstrate that our sensitivity bounds are can be orders of magnitude tighter than global sensitivity. Our approach provides a strong basis for the development of novel privacy preserving technologies.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2025

The Mosaic Memory of Large Language Models

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become widely adopted, understanding how they learn from, and memorize, training data becomes crucial. Memorization in LLMs is widely assumed to only occur as a result of sequences being repeated in the training data. Instead, we show that LLMs memorize by assembling information from similar sequences, a phenomena we call mosaic memory. We show major LLMs to exhibit mosaic memory, with fuzzy duplicates contributing to memorization as much as 0.8 of an exact duplicate and even heavily modified sequences contributing substantially to memorization. Despite models display reasoning capabilities, we somewhat surprisingly show memorization to be predominantly syntactic rather than semantic. We finally show fuzzy duplicates to be ubiquitous in real-world data, untouched by deduplication techniques. Taken together, our results challenge widely held beliefs and show memorization to be a more complex, mosaic process, with real-world implications for privacy, confidentiality, model utility and evaluation.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2025

The DCR Delusion: Measuring the Privacy Risk of Synthetic Data

Synthetic data has become an increasingly popular way to share data without revealing sensitive information. Though Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) are widely considered the gold standard for empirically assessing the privacy of a synthetic dataset, practitioners and researchers often rely on simpler proxy metrics such as Distance to Closest Record (DCR). These metrics estimate privacy by measuring the similarity between the training data and generated synthetic data. This similarity is also compared against that between the training data and a disjoint holdout set of real records to construct a binary privacy test. If the synthetic data is not more similar to the training data than the holdout set is, it passes the test and is considered private. In this work we show that, while computationally inexpensive, DCR and other distance-based metrics fail to identify privacy leakage. Across multiple datasets and both classical models such as Baynet and CTGAN and more recent diffusion models, we show that datasets deemed private by proxy metrics are highly vulnerable to MIAs. We similarly find both the binary privacy test and the continuous measure based on these metrics to be uninformative of actual membership inference risk. We further show that these failures are consistent across different metric hyperparameter settings and record selection methods. Finally, we argue DCR and other distance-based metrics to be flawed by design and show a example of a simple leakage they miss in practice. With this work, we hope to motivate practitioners to move away from proxy metrics to MIAs as the rigorous, comprehensive standard of evaluating privacy of synthetic data, in particular to make claims of datasets being legally anonymous.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2025

DeSIA: Attribute Inference Attacks Against Limited Fixed Aggregate Statistics

Empirical inference attacks are a popular approach for evaluating the privacy risk of data release mechanisms in practice. While an active attack literature exists to evaluate machine learning models or synthetic data release, we currently lack comparable methods for fixed aggregate statistics, in particular when only a limited number of statistics are released. We here propose an inference attack framework against fixed aggregate statistics and an attribute inference attack called DeSIA. We instantiate DeSIA against the U.S. Census PPMF dataset and show it to strongly outperform reconstruction-based attacks. In particular, we show DeSIA to be highly effective at identifying vulnerable users, achieving a true positive rate of 0.14 at a false positive rate of $10^{-3}$. We then show DeSIA to perform well against users whose attributes cannot be verified and when varying the number of aggregate statistics and level of noise addition. We also perform an extensive ablation study of DeSIA and show how DeSIA can be successfully adapted to the membership inference task. Overall, our results show that aggregation alone is not sufficient to protect privacy, even when a relatively small number of aggregates are being released, and emphasize the need for formal privacy mechanisms and testing before aggregate statistics are released.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2025

SoK: Membership Inference Attacks on LLMs are Rushing Nowhere (and How to Fix It)

Whether LLMs memorize their training data and what this means, from measuring privacy leakage to detecting copyright violations, has become a rapidly growing area of research. In the last few months, more than 10 new methods have been proposed to perform Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) against LLMs. Contrary to traditional MIAs which rely on fixed-but randomized-records or models, these methods are mostly trained and tested on datasets collected post-hoc. Sets of members and non-members, used to evaluate the MIA, are constructed using informed guesses after the release of a model. This lack of randomization raises concerns of a distribution shift between members and non-members. In this work, we first extensively review the literature on MIAs against LLMs and show that, while most work focuses on sequence-level MIAs evaluated in post-hoc setups, a range of target models, motivations and units of interest are considered. We then quantify distribution shifts present in 6 datasets used in the literature using a model-less bag of word classifier and show that all datasets constructed post-hoc suffer from strong distribution shifts. These shifts invalidate the claims of LLMs memorizing strongly in real-world scenarios and, potentially, also the methodological contributions of the recent papers based on these datasets. Yet, all hope might not be lost. We introduce important considerations to properly evaluate MIAs against LLMs and discuss, in turn, potential ways forwards: randomized test splits, injections of randomized (unique) sequences, randomized fine-tuning, and several post-hoc control methods. While each option comes with its advantages and limitations, we believe they collectively provide solid grounds to guide MIA development and study LLM memorization. We conclude with an overview of recommended approaches to benchmark sequence-level and document-level MIAs against LLMs.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2024

Watermarking Training Data of Music Generation Models

Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) models are increasingly used to produce content across domains, including text, images, and audio. While these models represent a major technical breakthrough, they gain their generative capabilities from being trained on enormous amounts of human-generated content, which often includes copyrighted material. In this work, we investigate whether audio watermarking techniques can be used to detect an unauthorized usage of content to train a music generation model. We compare outputs generated by a model trained on watermarked data to a model trained on non-watermarked data. We study factors that impact the model's generation behaviour: the watermarking technique, the proportion of watermarked samples in the training set, and the robustness of the watermarking technique against the model's tokenizer. Our results show that audio watermarking techniques, including some that are imperceptible to humans, can lead to noticeable shifts in the model's outputs. We also study the robustness of a state-of-the-art watermarking technique to removal techniques.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2024

QueryCheetah: Fast Automated Discovery of Attribute Inference Attacks Against Query-Based Systems

Query-based systems (QBSs) are one of the key approaches for sharing data. QBSs allow analysts to request aggregate information from a private protected dataset. Attacks are a crucial part of ensuring QBSs are truly privacy-preserving. The development and testing of attacks is however very labor-intensive and unable to cope with the increasing complexity of systems. Automated approaches have been shown to be promising but are currently extremely computationally intensive, limiting their applicability in practice. We here propose QueryCheetah, a fast and effective method for automated discovery of privacy attacks against QBSs. We instantiate QueryCheetah on attribute inference attacks and show it to discover stronger attacks than previous methods while being 18 times faster than the state-of-the-art automated approach. We then show how QueryCheetah allows system developers to thoroughly evaluate the privacy risk, including for various attacker strengths and target individuals. We finally show how QueryCheetah can be used out-of-the-box to find attacks in larger syntaxes and workarounds around ad-hoc defenses.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2024

Correlation inference attacks against machine learning models

Despite machine learning models being widely used today, the relationship between a model and its training dataset is not well understood. We explore correlation inference attacks, whether and when a model leaks information about the correlations between the input variables of its training dataset. We first propose a model-less attack, where an adversary exploits the spherical parametrization of correlation matrices alone to make an informed guess. Second, we propose a model-based attack, where an adversary exploits black-box model access to infer the correlations using minimal and realistic assumptions. Third, we evaluate our attacks against logistic regression and multilayer perceptron models on three tabular datasets and show the models to leak correlations. We finally show how extracted correlations can be used as building blocks for attribute inference attacks and enable weaker adversaries. Our results raise fundamental questions on what a model does and should remember from its training set.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2024

Did the Neurons Read your Book? Document-level Membership Inference for Large Language Models

With large language models (LLMs) poised to become embedded in our daily lives, questions are starting to be raised about the data they learned from. These questions range from potential bias or misinformation LLMs could retain from their training data to questions of copyright and fair use of human-generated text. However, while these questions emerge, developers of the recent state-of-the-art LLMs become increasingly reluctant to disclose details on their training corpus. We here introduce the task of document-level membership inference for real-world LLMs, i.e. inferring whether the LLM has seen a given document during training or not. First, we propose a procedure for the development and evaluation of document-level membership inference for LLMs by leveraging commonly used data sources for training and the model release date. We then propose a practical, black-box method to predict document-level membership and instantiate it on OpenLLaMA-7B with both books and academic papers. We show our methodology to perform very well, reaching an AUC of 0.856 for books and 0.678 for papers. We then show our approach to outperform the sentence-level membership inference attacks used in the privacy literature for the document-level membership task. We further evaluate whether smaller models might be less sensitive to document-level inference and show OpenLLaMA-3B to be approximately as sensitive as OpenLLaMA-7B to our approach. Finally, we consider two mitigation strategies and find the AUC to slowly decrease when only partial documents are considered but to remain fairly high when the model precision is reduced. Taken together, our results show that accurate document-level membership can be inferred for LLMs, increasing the transparency of technology poised to change our lives.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2024

A Zero Auxiliary Knowledge Membership Inference Attack on Aggregate Location Data

Location data is frequently collected from populations and shared in aggregate form to guide policy and decision making. However, the prevalence of aggregated data also raises the privacy concern of membership inference attacks (MIAs). MIAs infer whether an individual's data contributed to the aggregate release. Although effective MIAs have been developed for aggregate location data, these require access to an extensive auxiliary dataset of individual traces over the same locations, which are collected from a similar population. This assumption is often impractical given common privacy practices surrounding location data. To measure the risk of an MIA performed by a realistic adversary, we develop the first Zero Auxiliary Knowledge (ZK) MIA on aggregate location data, which eliminates the need for an auxiliary dataset of real individual traces. Instead, we develop a novel synthetic approach, such that suitable synthetic traces are generated from the released aggregate. We also develop methods to correct for bias and noise, to show that our synthetic-based attack is still applicable when privacy mechanisms are applied prior to release. Using two large-scale location datasets, we demonstrate that our ZK MIA matches the state-of-the-art Knock-Knock (KK) MIA across a wide range of settings, including popular implementations of differential privacy (DP) and suppression of small counts. Furthermore, we show that ZK MIA remains highly effective even when the adversary only knows a small fraction (10%) of their target's location history. This demonstrates that effective MIAs can be performed by realistic adversaries, highlighting the need for strong DP protection.

cs.CR↗