mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Denial-of-Service or Fine-Grained Control: Towards Flexible Model Poisoning Attacks on Federated Learning

arXiv 2304.10783 ↗First posted 21 Apr 2023cs.LG cs.CR cs.DCcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Federated learning (FL) is vulnerable to poisoning attacks, where adversaries corrupt the global aggregation results and cause denial-of-service (DoS). Unlike recent model poisoning attacks that optimize the amplitude of malicious perturbations along certain prescribed directions to cause DoS, we propose a Flexible Model Poisoning Attack (FMPA) that can achieve versatile attack goals. We consider a practical threat scenario where no extra knowledge about the FL system (e.g., aggregation rules or updates on benign devices) is available to adversaries. FMPA exploits the global historical information to construct an estimator that predicts the next round of the global model as a benign reference. It then fine-tunes the reference model to obtain the desired poisoned model with low accuracy and small perturbations. Besides the goal of causing DoS, FMPA can be naturally extended to launch a fine-grained controllable attack, making it possible to precisely reduce the global accuracy. Armed with precise control, malicious FL service providers can gain advantages over their competitors without getting noticed, hence opening a new attack surface in FL other than DoS. Even for the purpose of DoS, experiments show that FMPA significantly decreases the global accuracy, outperforming six state-of-the-art attacks.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 Apr 2023.

Builds on

21 of 41 references.

References · 21

  1. 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,592
  2. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  3. 2019Advances and Open Problems in Federated Learningcited by 3,021
  4. 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,976
  5. 2018Byzantine-Robust Distributed Learning: Towards Optimal Statistical Ratescited by 698
  6. 2019Local Model Poisoning Attacks to Byzantine-Robust Federated Learningcited by 479
  7. 2020FLTrust: Byzantine-robust Federated Learning via Trust Bootstrappingcited by 330
  8. 2018The Hidden Vulnerability of Distributed Learning in Byzantiumcited by 324
  9. 2020Attack of the Tails: Yes, You Really Can Backdoor Federated Learningcited by 307
  10. 2019A Little Is Enough: Circumventing Defenses For Distributed Learningcited by 285
  11. 2020Data Poisoning Attacks Against Federated Learning Systemscited by 266
  12. 2019Can You Really Backdoor Federated Learning?cited by 250
9 more
  1. 2018RSA: Byzantine-Robust Stochastic Aggregation Methods for Distributed Learning from Heterogeneous Datasetscited by 148
  2. 2020Learning from History for Byzantine Robust Optimizationcited by 137
  3. 2019Fall of Empires: Breaking Byzantine-tolerant SGD by Inner Product Manipulationcited by 136
  4. 2022FLDetector: Defending Federated Learning Against Model Poisoning Attacks via Detecting Malicious Clientscited by 119
  5. 2018Generalized Byzantine-tolerant SGDcited by 94
  6. 2019Byzantine-Robust Federated Machine Learning through Adaptive Model Averagingcited by 70
  7. 2022MPAF: Model Poisoning Attacks to Federated Learning based on Fake Clientscited by 65
  8. 2021SparseFed: Mitigating Model Poisoning Attacks in Federated Learning with Sparsificationcited by 46
  9. 2022Shielding Federated Learning: Robust Aggregation with Adaptive Client Selectioncited by 18

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 3; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.

9 papers.