An Investigation on Learning, Polluting, and Unlearning the Spam Emails for Lifelong Learning
On the map: LLM safety and security → Machine unlearning
Abstract (arXiv)
Machine unlearning for security is studied in this context. Several spam email detection methods exist, each of which employs a different algorithm to detect undesired spam emails. But these models are vulnerable to attacks. Many attackers exploit the model by polluting the data, which are trained to the model in various ways. So to act deftly in such situations model needs to readily unlearn the polluted data without the need for retraining. Retraining is impractical in most cases as there is already a massive amount of data trained to the model in the past, which needs to be trained again just for removing a small amount of polluted data, which is often significantly less than 1%. This problem can be solved by developing unlearning frameworks for all spam detection models. In this research, unlearning module is integrated into spam detection models that are based on Naive Bayes, Decision trees, and Random Forests algorithms. To assess the benefits of unlearning over retraining, three spam detection models are polluted and exploited by taking attackers' positions and proving models' vulnerability. Reduction in accuracy and true positive rates are shown in each case showing the effect of pollution on models. Then unlearning modules are integrated into the models, and polluted data is unlearned; on testing the models after unlearning, restoration of performance is seen. Also, unlearning and retraining times are compared with different pollution data sizes on all models. On analyzing the findings, it can be concluded that unlearning is considerably superior to retraining. Results show that unlearning is fast, easy to implement, easy to use, and effective.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Machine unlearning, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 7 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Nov 2021.
Builds on
7 of 23 references.
References · 7
- 2019Machine Unlearningcited by 1,056
- 2020Descent-to-Delete: Gradient-Based Methods for Machine Unlearningcited by 310
- 2020Machine Unlearning for Random Forestscited by 131
- 2020Variational Bayesian Unlearningcited by 116
- 2020Coded Machine Unlearningcited by 36
- 2021Measuring the impact of spammers on e-mail and Twitter networkscited by 5
- 2021DeepBF: Malicious URL detection using Learned Bloom Filter and Evolutionary Deep Learningcited by 4
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 1.
2 papers.
- 2022A Survey of Machine Unlearningcited by 311
- 2024A Survey on Machine Unlearning: Techniques and New Emerged Privacy Riskscited by 15
- 2024A Survey on Machine Unlearning: Techniques and New Emerged Privacy Risks10 Jun 2024
- 2022A Survey of Machine Unlearning6 Sep 2022
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2023Machine Unlearning: Solutions and Challenges
- 2025An Investigation of Large Language Models and Their Vulnerabilities in Spam Detection
- 2024Releasing Malevolence from Benevolence: The Menace of Benign Data on Machine Unlearning
- 2024Machine Unlearning: A Comprehensive Survey
- 2024Unlearning or Obfuscating? Jogging the Memory of Unlearned LLMs via Benign Relearning
- 2024Learn What You Want to Unlearn: Unlearning Inversion Attacks against Machine Unlearning
- 2025Soft Token Attacks Cannot Reliably Audit Unlearning in Large Language Models
- 2024Machine Unlearning: Taxonomy, Metrics, Applications, Challenges, and Prospects