LTU Attacker for Membership Inference
On the map: LLM safety and security → Membership inference attacks
Abstract (arXiv)
We address the problem of defending predictive models, such as machine learning classifiers (Defender models), against membership inference attacks, in both the black-box and white-box setting, when the trainer and the trained model are publicly released. The Defender aims at optimizing a dual objective: utility and privacy. Both utility and privacy are evaluated with an external apparatus including an Attacker and an Evaluator. On one hand, Reserved data, distributed similarly to the Defender training data, is used to evaluate Utility; on the other hand, Reserved data, mixed with Defender training data, is used to evaluate membership inference attack robustness. In both cases classification accuracy or error rate are used as the metric: Utility is evaluated with the classification accuracy of the Defender model; Privacy is evaluated with the membership prediction error of a so-called "Leave-Two-Unlabeled" LTU Attacker, having access to all of the Defender and Reserved data, except for the membership label of one sample from each. We prove that, under certain conditions, even a "na"ive" LTU Attacker can achieve lower bounds on privacy loss with simple attack strategies, leading to concrete necessary conditions to protect privacy, including: preventing over-fitting and adding some amount of randomness. However, we also show that such a na"ive LTU Attacker can fail to attack the privacy of models known to be vulnerable in the literature, demonstrating that knowledge must be complemented with strong attack strategies to turn the LTU Attacker into a powerful means of evaluating privacy. Our experiments on the QMNIST and CIFAR-10 datasets validate our theoretical results and confirm the roles of over-fitting prevention and randomness in the algorithms to protect against privacy attacks.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Membership inference attacks, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 18 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Feb 2022.
Builds on
18 of 32 references.
References · 18
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
- 2015Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networkscited by 3,023
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
- 2021EfficientNetV2: Smaller Models and Faster Trainingcited by 1,127
- 2020Systematic Evaluation of Privacy Risks of Machine Learning Modelscited by 273
- 2019White-box vs Black-box: Bayes Optimal Strategies for Membership Inferencecited by 265
- 2018Differentially Private Generative Adversarial Networkcited by 235
- 2019MemGuard: Defending against Black-Box Membership Inference Attacks via Adversarial Examplescited by 183
- 2018Machine Learning with Membership Privacy using Adversarial Regularizationcited by 177
- 2021Deep Subdomain Adaptation Network for Image Classificationcited by 119
6 more
- 2020Revisiting Membership Inference Under Realistic Assumptionscited by 108
- 2019Cold Case: The Lost MNIST Digitscited by 61
- 2017Towards Measuring Membership Privacycited by 27
- 2020DAMIA: Leveraging Domain Adaptation as a Defense against Membership Inference Attackscited by 9
- 2020MACE: A Flexible Framework for Membership Privacy Estimation in Generative Modelscited by 5
- 2022OmniPrint: A Configurable Printed Character Synthesizercited by 5
Built on by
Not cited yet.