mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Locality-Sensitive Hashing Does Not Guarantee Privacy! Attacks on Google's FLoC and the MinHash Hierarchy System

arXiv 2302.13635 ↗First posted 27 Feb 2023cs.CRcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recently proposed systems aim at achieving privacy using locality-sensitive hashing. We show how these approaches fail by presenting attacks against two such systems: Google's FLoC proposal for privacy-preserving targeted advertising and the MinHash Hierarchy, a system for processing mobile users' traffic behavior in a privacy-preserving way. Our attacks refute the pre-image resistance, anonymity, and privacy guarantees claimed for these systems. In the case of FLoC, we show how to deanonymize users using Sybil attacks and to reconstruct 10% or more of the browsing history for 30% of its users using Generative Adversarial Networks. We achieve this only analyzing the hashes used by FLoC. For MinHash, we precisely identify the movement of a subset of individuals and, on average, we can limit users' movement to just 10% of the possible geographic area, again using just the hashes. In addition, we refute their differential privacy claims.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2023.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.