mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Careful What You Wish For: on the Extraction of Adversarially Trained Models

arXiv 2207.10561 ↗First posted 21 Jul 2022cs.LG cs.CRcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent attacks on Machine Learning (ML) models such as evasion attacks with adversarial examples and models stealing through extraction attacks pose several security and privacy threats. Prior work proposes to use adversarial training to secure models from adversarial examples that can evade the classification of a model and deteriorate its performance. However, this protection technique affects the model's decision boundary and its prediction probabilities, hence it might raise model privacy risks. In fact, a malicious user using only a query access to the prediction output of a model can extract it and obtain a high-accuracy and high-fidelity surrogate model. To have a greater extraction, these attacks leverage the prediction probabilities of the victim model. Indeed, all previous work on extraction attacks do not take into consideration the changes in the training process for security purposes. In this paper, we propose a framework to assess extraction attacks on adversarially trained models with vision datasets. To the best of our knowledge, our work is the first to perform such evaluation. Through an extensive empirical study, we demonstrate that adversarially trained models are more vulnerable to extraction attacks than models obtained under natural training circumstances. They can achieve up to ×1.2 higher accuracy and agreement with a fraction lower than ×0.75 of the queries. We additionally find that the adversarial robustness capability is transferable through extraction attacks, i.e., extracted Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) from robust models show an enhanced accuracy to adversarial examples compared to extracted DNNs from naturally trained (i.e. standard) models.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 43 of its 66 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Jul 2022.

Builds on

43 of 66 references.

References · 43

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
  4. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,498
  5. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
  6. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
  7. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,155
  8. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
  9. 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,769
  10. 2019Energy and Policy Considerations for Deep Learning in NLPcited by 1,254
  11. 2016Practical Black-Box Attacks against Machine Learningcited by 903
  12. 2015The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settingscited by 790
31 more
  1. 2017Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Timecited by 689
  2. 2015Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networkscited by 678
  3. 2016Stealing Machine Learning Models via Prediction APIscited by 619
  4. 2018The Open Images Dataset V4: Unified image classification, object detection, and visual relationship detection at scalecited by 544
  5. 2018Knockoff Nets: Stealing Functionality of Black-Box Modelscited by 292
  6. 2018Manipulating Machine Learning: Poisoning Attacks and Countermeasures for Regression Learningcited by 225
  7. 2019High Accuracy and High Fidelity Extraction of Neural Networkscited by 214
  8. 2018PRADA: Protecting against DNN Model Stealing Attackscited by 165
  9. 2020Entangled Watermarks as a Defense against Model Extractioncited by 149
  10. 2019Privacy Risks of Securing Machine Learning Models against Adversarial Examplescited by 141
  11. 2019Thieves on Sesame Street! Model Extraction of BERT-based APIscited by 139
  12. 2020Data-Free Model Extractioncited by 124
  13. 2016Crafting Adversarial Input Sequences for Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 103
  14. 2019DAWN: Dynamic Adversarial Watermarking of Neural Networkscited by 100
  15. 2020MAZE: Data-Free Model Stealing Attack Using Zeroth-Order Gradient Estimationcited by 99
  16. 2018Is feature selection secure against training data poisoning?cited by 93
  17. 2016Towards the Science of Security and Privacy in Machine Learningcited by 89
  18. 2019Prediction Poisoning: Towards Defenses Against DNN Model Stealing Attackscited by 81
  19. 2018Copycat CNN: Stealing Knowledge by Persuading Confession with Random Non-Labeled Datacited by 70
  20. 2018Cache Telepathy: Leveraging Shared Resource Attacks to Learn DNN Architecturescited by 57
  21. 2019Defending Against Model Stealing Attacks with Adaptive Misinformationcited by 57
  22. 2017Model Extraction Warning in MLaaS Paradigmcited by 40
  23. 2019Open DNN Box by Power Side-Channel Attackcited by 28
  24. 2018I Know What You See: Power Side-Channel Attack on Convolutional Neural Network Acceleratorscited by 27
  25. 2020ES Attack: Model Stealing against Deep Neural Networks without Data Hurdlescited by 25
  26. 2018Security Analysis of Deep Neural Networks Operating in the Presence of Cache Side-Channel Attackscited by 19
  27. 2019Extraction of Complex DNN Models: Real Threat or Boogeyman?cited by 19
  28. 2018Defending Against Machine Learning Model Stealing Attacks Using Deceptive Perturbationscited by 11
  29. 2018Defense Against the Dark Arts: An overview of adversarial example security research and future research directionscited by 11
  30. 2020How to 0wn NAS in Your Spare Timecited by 11
  31. 2020Robustness and Diversity Seeking Data-Free Knowledge Distillationcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 0; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

6 papers.