Identifying Backdoor Attacks in Federated Learning via Anomaly Detection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Federated learning has seen increased adoption in recent years in response to the growing regulatory demand for data privacy. However, the opaque local training process of federated learning also sparks rising concerns about model faithfulness. For instance, studies have revealed that federated learning is vulnerable to backdoor attacks, whereby a compromised participant can stealthily modify the model's behavior in the presence of backdoor triggers. This paper proposes an effective defense against the attack by examining shared model updates. We begin with the observation that the embedding of backdoors influences the participants' local model weights in terms of the magnitude and orientation of their model gradients, which can manifest as distinguishable disparities. We enable a robust identification of backdoors by studying the statistical distribution of the models' subsets of gradients. Concretely, we first segment the model gradients into fragment vectors that represent small portions of model parameters. We then employ anomaly detection to locate the distributionally skewed fragments and prune the participants with the most outliers. We embody the findings in a novel defense method, ARIBA. We demonstrate through extensive analyses that our proposed methods effectively mitigate state-of-the-art backdoor attacks with minimal impact on task utility.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Feb 2022.
Builds on
23 of 32 references.
References · 23
- 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,592
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
- 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,021
- 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,531
- 2016Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiencycited by 1,461
- 2019On the Convergence of FedAvg on Non-IID Datacited by 1,220
- 2017BadNets: Identifying Vulnerabilities in the Machine Learning Model Supply Chaincited by 1,052
- 2017Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoningcited by 1,012
- 2018How To Backdoor Federated Learningcited by 745
- 2018Byzantine-Robust Distributed Learning: Towards Optimal Statistical Ratescited by 698
- 2019A Survey on Federated Learning Systems: Vision, Hype and Reality for Data Privacy and Protectioncited by 371
- 2018Analyzing Federated Learning through an Adversarial Lenscited by 346
11 more
- 2018The Hidden Vulnerability of Distributed Learning in Byzantiumcited by 324
- 2020Attack of the Tails: Yes, You Really Can Backdoor Federated Learningcited by 307
- 2017Certified Defenses for Data Poisoning Attackscited by 288
- 2020Data Poisoning Attacks Against Federated Learning Systemscited by 266
- 2019Can You Really Backdoor Federated Learning?cited by 250
- 2020Dataset Security for Machine Learning: Data Poisoning, Backdoor Attacks, and Defensescited by 171
- 2018Mitigating Sybils in Federated Learning Poisoningcited by 158
- 2020Learning to Detect Malicious Clients for Robust Federated Learningcited by 86
- 2018Model-Reuse Attacks on Deep Learning Systemscited by 47
- 2020Mitigating Backdoor Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 39
- 2018PoTrojan: powerful neural-level trojan designs in deep learning modelscited by 9
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.
1 paper.