A Fusion-Denoising Attack on InstaHide with Data Augmentation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
InstaHide is a state-of-the-art mechanism for protecting private training images, by mixing multiple private images and modifying them such that their visual features are indistinguishable to the naked eye. In recent work, however, Carlini et al. show that it is possible to reconstruct private images from the encrypted dataset generated by InstaHide. Nevertheless, we demonstrate that Carlini et al.'s attack can be easily defeated by incorporating data augmentation into InstaHide. This leads to a natural question: is InstaHide with data augmentation secure? In this paper, we provide a negative answer to this question, by devising an attack for recovering private images from the outputs of InstaHide even when data augmentation is present. The basic idea is to use a comparative network to identify encrypted images that are likely to correspond to the same private image, and then employ a fusion-denoising network for restoring the private image from the encrypted ones, taking into account the effects of data augmentation. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed attack in comparison to Carlini et al.'s attack.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 May 2021.
Builds on
20 of 43 references.
References · 20
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
- 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,155
- 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
- 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,021
- 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,531
- 2019MixMatch: A Holistic Approach to Semi-Supervised Learningcited by 1,390
- 2019Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 1,004
- 2019Federated Machine Learning: Concept and Applicationscited by 409
- 2017Deep Models Under the GAN: Information Leakage from Collaborative Deep Learningcited by 326
- 2019Residual Non-local Attention Networks for Image Restorationcited by 236
- 2018Residual Dense Network for Image Restorationcited by 181
8 more
- 2015Inverting Visual Representations with Convolutional Networkscited by 168
- 2015Learning to Compare Image Patches via Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 109
- 2020Feature Inference Attack on Model Predictions in Vertical Federated Learningcited by 105
- 2020InstaHide: Instance-hiding Schemes for Private Distributed Learningcited by 90
- 2020Privacy Preserving Vertical Federated Learning for Tree-based Modelscited by 89
- 2020Is Private Learning Possible with Instance Encoding?cited by 22
- 2020Exploiting Defenses against GAN-Based Feature Inference Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 7
- 2020Image Obfuscation for Privacy-Preserving Machine Learningcited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024Feature Inference Attack on Shapley Valuescited by 9
- 2024Exploring Privacy and Fairness Risks in Sharing Diffusion Models: An Adversarial Perspectivecited by 6
- 2026LDP-Slicing: Local Differential Privacy for Images via Randomized Bit-Plane Slicingcited by 2
- 2022IPProtect: protecting the intellectual property of visual datasets during data valuationcited by 1
- 2026LDP-Slicing: Local Differential Privacy for Images via Randomized Bit-Plane Slicing4 Mar 2026
- 2024Feature Inference Attack on Shapley Values16 Jul 2024
- 2024Exploring Privacy and Fairness Risks in Sharing Diffusion Models: An Adversarial Perspective28 Feb 2024
- 2022IPProtect: protecting the intellectual property of visual datasets during data valuation22 Dec 2022