mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

QuerySnout: Automating the Discovery of Attribute Inference Attacks against Query-Based Systems

arXiv 2211.05249 ↗First posted 9 Nov 2022cs.CR cs.AIcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Although query-based systems (QBS) have become one of the main solutions to share data anonymously, building QBSes that robustly protect the privacy of individuals contributing to the dataset is a hard problem. Theoretical solutions relying on differential privacy guarantees are difficult to implement correctly with reasonable accuracy, while ad-hoc solutions might contain unknown vulnerabilities. Evaluating the privacy provided by QBSes must thus be done by evaluating the accuracy of a wide range of privacy attacks. However, existing attacks require time and expertise to develop, need to be manually tailored to the specific systems attacked, and are limited in scope. In this paper, we develop QuerySnout (QS), the first method to automatically discover vulnerabilities in QBSes. QS takes as input a target record and the QBS as a black box, analyzes its behavior on one or more datasets, and outputs a multiset of queries together with a rule to combine answers to them in order to reveal the sensitive attribute of the target record. QS uses evolutionary search techniques based on a novel mutation operator to find a multiset of queries susceptible to lead to an attack, and a machine learning classifier to infer the sensitive attribute from answers to the queries selected. We showcase the versatility of QS by applying it to two attack scenarios, three real-world datasets, and a variety of protection mechanisms. We show the attacks found by QS to consistently equate or outperform, sometimes by a large margin, the best attacks from the literature. We finally show how QS can be extended to QBSes that require a budget, and apply QS to a simple QBS based on the Laplace mechanism. Taken together, our results show how powerful and accurate attacks against QBSes can already be found by an automated system, allowing for highly complex QBSes to be automatically tested "at the pressing of a button".

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 61 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Nov 2022.

Builds on

18 of 61 references.

References · 18

  1. 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
  2. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
  3. 2014Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Imagescited by 776
  4. 2017One pixel attack for fooling deep neural networkscited by 582
  5. 2018Adversarial Attack on Graph Structured Datacited by 301
  6. 2020Auditing Differentially Private Machine Learning: How Private is Private SGD?cited by 218
  7. 2018CatBoost: gradient boosting with categorical features supportcited by 208
  8. 2022Reconstructing Training Data with Informed Adversariescited by 148
  9. 2013Hacking Smart Machines with Smarter Ones: How to Extract Meaningful Data from Machine Learning Classifierscited by 130
  10. 2020Synthetic Data -- Anonymisation Groundhog Daycited by 108
  11. 2018GenAttack: Practical Black-box Attacks with Gradient-Free Optimizationcited by 82
  12. 2017Knock Knock, Who's There? Membership Inference on Aggregate Location Datacited by 70
6 more
  1. 2021Differentially Private Query Release Through Adaptive Projectioncited by 52
  2. 2017Towards Practical Differential Privacy for SQL Queriescited by 19
  3. 2018Linear Program Reconstruction in Practicecited by 14
  4. 2018When the signal is in the noise: Exploiting Diffix's Sticky Noisecited by 10
  5. 2018PriPeARL: A Framework for Privacy-Preserving Analytics and Reporting at LinkedIncited by 7
  6. 2019Averaging Attacks on Bounded Noise-based Disclosure Control Algorithmscited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 3; 2025: 1.

6 papers.