mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Feature Importance Guided Attack: A Model Agnostic Adversarial Attack

arXiv 2106.14815 ↗First posted 28 Jun 2021cs.LG cs.AI cs.CRcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Research in adversarial learning has primarily focused on homogeneous unstructured datasets, which often map into the problem space naturally. Inverting a feature space attack on heterogeneous datasets into the problem space is much more challenging, particularly the task of finding the perturbation to perform. This work presents a formal search strategy: the `Feature Importance Guided Attack' (FIGA), which finds perturbations in the feature space of heterogeneous tabular datasets to produce evasion attacks. We first demonstrate FIGA in the feature space and then in the problem space. FIGA assumes no prior knowledge of the defending model's learning algorithm and does not require any gradient information. FIGA assumes knowledge of the feature representation and the mean feature values of defending model's dataset. FIGA leverages feature importance rankings by perturbing the most important features of the input in the direction of the target class. While FIGA is conceptually similar to other work which uses feature selection processes (e.g., mimicry attacks), we formalize an attack algorithm with three tunable parameters and investigate the strength of FIGA on tabular datasets. We demonstrate the effectiveness of FIGA by evading phishing detection models trained on four different tabular phishing datasets and one financial dataset with an average success rate of 94%. We extend FIGA to the phishing problem space by limiting the possible perturbations to be valid and feasible in the phishing domain. We generate valid adversarial phishing sites that are visually identical to their unperturbed counterpart and use them to attack six tabular ML models achieving a 13.05% average success rate.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Jun 2021.

Builds on

16 of 48 references.

References · 16

  1. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,166
  2. 2017Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Timecited by 689
  3. 2017Wild Patterns: Ten Years After the Rise of Adversarial Machine Learningcited by 414
  4. 2017Deep Models Under the GAN: Information Leakage from Collaborative Deep Learningcited by 334
  5. 2018Tranco: A Research-Oriented Top Sites Ranking Hardened Against Manipulationcited by 63
  6. 2021Adversarial Attacks for Tabular Data: Application to Fraud Detection and Imbalanced Datacited by 45
  7. 2019Imperceptible Adversarial Attacks on Tabular Datacited by 35
  8. 2019Deep Neural Rejection against Adversarial Examplescited by 32
  9. 2021Adversarial Robustness with Non-uniform Perturbationscited by 17
  10. 2020Advanced Evasion Attacks and Mitigations on Practical ML-Based Phishing Website Classifierscited by 16
  11. 2020PermuteAttack: Counterfactual Explanation of Machine Learning Credit Scorecardscited by 16
  12. 2020Not All Datasets Are Born Equal: On Heterogeneous Data and Adversarial Examplescited by 9
4 more
  1. 2018Robust Classification of Financial Riskcited by 8
  2. 2020High Accuracy Phishing Detection Based on Convolutional Neural Networkscited by 7
  3. 2015Know Your Phish: Novel Techniques for Detecting Phishing Sites and their Targetscited by 3
  4. 2019Potential adversarial samples for white-box attackscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 3.

10 papers.