With Great Dispersion Comes Greater Resilience: Efficient Poisoning Attacks and Defenses for Linear Regression Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
With the rise of third parties in the machine learning pipeline, the service provider in "Machine Learning as a Service" (MLaaS), or external data contributors in online learning, or the retraining of existing models, the need to ensure the security of the resulting machine learning models has become an increasingly important topic. The security community has demonstrated that without transparency of the data and the resulting model, there exist many potential security risks, with new risks constantly being discovered. In this paper, we focus on one of these security risks -- poisoning attacks. Specifically, we analyze how attackers may interfere with the results of regression learning by poisoning the training datasets. To this end, we analyze and develop a new poisoning attack algorithm. Our attack, termed Nopt, in contrast with previous poisoning attack algorithms, can produce larger errors with the same proportion of poisoning data-points. Furthermore, we also significantly improve the state-of-the-art defense algorithm, termed TRIM, proposed by Jagielsk et al. (IEEE S&P 2018), by incorporating the concept of probability estimation of clean data-points into the algorithm. Our new defense algorithm, termed Proda, demonstrates an increased effectiveness in reducing errors arising from the poisoning dataset through optimizing ensemble models. We highlight that the time complexity of TRIM had not been estimated; however, we deduce from their work that TRIM can take exponential time complexity in the worst-case scenario, in excess of Proda's logarithmic time. The performance of both our proposed attack and defense algorithms is extensively evaluated on four real-world datasets of housing prices, loans, health care, and bike sharing services. We hope that our work will inspire future research to develop more robust learning algorithms immune to poisoning attacks.
Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 21 Jun 2020.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 3; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
9 papers.
- 2022Wild Patterns Reloaded: A Survey of Machine Learning Security against Training Data Poisoningcited by 93
- 2021Hidden Backdoors in Human-Centric Language Modelscited by 83
- 2022FLCert: Provably Secure Federated Learning against Poisoning Attackscited by 29
- 2022Poisoning Attacks and Defenses on Artificial Intelligence: A Surveycited by 15
- 2021Oriole: Thwarting Privacy against Trustworthy Deep Learning Modelscited by 2
- 2024Adaptive Coded Federated Learning: Privacy Preservation and Straggler Mitigationcited by 1
- 2025Evasion Attacks Against Bayesian Predictive Modelscited by 1
- 2026Stealthy Poisoning Attacks Bypass Defenses in Regression Settingscited by 0
- 2026When Clients Are Orchestrated: Strategic Gradient Manipulation to Defeat Federated Learning Servers with Efficient Defensecited by 0
- 2026When Clients Are Orchestrated: Strategic Gradient Manipulation to Defeat Federated Learning Servers with Efficient Defense22 Sep 2026
- 2026Stealthy Poisoning Attacks Bypass Defenses in Regression Settings29 Jan 2026
- 2025Evasion Attacks Against Bayesian Predictive Models11 Jun 2025
- 2024Adaptive Coded Federated Learning: Privacy Preservation and Straggler Mitigation22 Mar 2024
- 2022FLCert: Provably Secure Federated Learning against Poisoning Attacks2 Oct 2022
- 2022Wild Patterns Reloaded: A Survey of Machine Learning Security against Training Data Poisoning4 May 2022
- 2022Poisoning Attacks and Defenses on Artificial Intelligence: A Survey21 Feb 2022
- 2021Hidden Backdoors in Human-Centric Language Models1 May 2021
- 2021Oriole: Thwarting Privacy against Trustworthy Deep Learning Models23 Feb 2021