Privacy for All: Demystify Vulnerability Disparity of Differential Privacy against Membership Inference Attack
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine learning algorithms, when applied to sensitive data, pose a potential threat to privacy. A growing body of prior work has demonstrated that membership inference attack (MIA) can disclose specific private information in the training data to an attacker. Meanwhile, the algorithmic fairness of machine learning has increasingly caught attention from both academia and industry. Algorithmic fairness ensures that the machine learning models do not discriminate a particular demographic group of individuals (e.g., black and female people). Given that MIA is indeed a learning model, it raises a serious concern if MIA ``fairly'' treats all groups of individuals equally. In other words, whether a particular group is more vulnerable against MIA than the other groups. This paper examines the algorithmic fairness issue in the context of MIA and its defenses. First, for fairness evaluation, it formalizes the notation of vulnerability disparity (VD) to quantify the difference of MIA treatment on different demographic groups. Second, it evaluates VD on four real-world datasets, and shows that VD indeed exists in these datasets. Third, it examines the impacts of differential privacy, as a defense mechanism of MIA, on VD. The results show that although DP brings significant change on VD, it cannot eliminate VD completely. Therefore, fourth, it designs a new mitigation algorithm named FAIRPICK to reduce VD. An extensive set of experimental results demonstrate that FAIRPICK can effectively reduce VD for both with and without the DP deployment.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 24 Jan 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 0; 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 1.
4 papers.
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks on Machine Learning: A Surveycited by 306
- 2023SoK: Unintended Interactions among Machine Learning Defenses and Riskscited by 6
- 2024Some Targets Are Harder to Identify than Others: Quantifying the Target-dependent Membership Leakagecited by 3
- 2025Towards High Supervised Learning Utility Training Data Generation: Data Pruning and Column Reorderingcited by 0
- 2025Towards High Supervised Learning Utility Training Data Generation: Data Pruning and Column Reordering14 Jul 2025
- 2024Some Targets Are Harder to Identify than Others: Quantifying the Target-dependent Membership Leakage15 Feb 2024
- 2023SoK: Unintended Interactions among Machine Learning Defenses and Risks7 Dec 2023
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks on Machine Learning: A Survey14 Mar 2021