From Zero to Hero: Detecting Leaked Data through Synthetic Data Injection and Model Querying
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Safeguarding the Intellectual Property (IP) of data has become critically important as machine learning applications continue to proliferate, and their success heavily relies on the quality of training data. While various mechanisms exist to secure data during storage, transmission, and consumption, fewer studies have been developed to detect whether they are already leaked for model training without authorization. This issue is particularly challenging due to the absence of information and control over the training process conducted by potential attackers. In this paper, we concentrate on the domain of tabular data and introduce a novel methodology, Local Distribution Shifting Synthesis (textscLDSS), to detect leaked data that are used to train classification models. The core concept behind textscLDSS involves injecting a small volume of synthetic data--characterized by local shifts in class distribution--into the owner's dataset. This enables the effective identification of models trained on leaked data through model querying alone, as the synthetic data injection results in a pronounced disparity in the predictions of models trained on leaked and modified datasets. textscLDSS is model-oblivious and hence compatible with a diverse range of classification models. We have conducted extensive experiments on seven types of classification models across five real-world datasets. The comprehensive results affirm the reliability, robustness, fidelity, security, and efficiency of textscLDSS. Extending textscLDSS to regression tasks further highlights its versatility and efficacy compared with baseline methods.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2023.
Builds on
23 of 58 references.
References · 23
- 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
- 2017Billion-scale similarity search with GPUscited by 2,477
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
- 2017Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoningcited by 1,012
- 2018Poison Frogs! Targeted Clean-Label Poisoning Attacks on Neural Networkscited by 500
- 2019Hidden Trigger Backdoor Attackscited by 359
- 2018Turning Your Weakness Into a Strength: Watermarking Deep Neural Networks by Backdooringcited by 334
- 2017Embedding Watermarks into Deep Neural Networkscited by 227
- 2017Machine Learning Models that Remember Too Muchcited by 165
- 2017Adversarial Frontier Stitching for Remote Neural Network Watermarkingcited by 110
- 2019DAWN: Dynamic Adversarial Watermarking of Neural Networkscited by 94
- 2021A survey of deep neural network watermarking techniquescited by 69
11 more
- 2020Model Watermarking for Image Processing Networkscited by 49
- 2020A Systematic Review on Model Watermarking for Neural Networkscited by 49
- 2019Robust Watermarking of Neural Network with Exponential Weightingcited by 48
- 2021Deep Model Intellectual Property Protection via Deep Watermarkingcited by 47
- 2022Supervised GAN Watermarking for Intellectual Property Protectioncited by 39
- 2020Open-sourced Dataset Protection via Backdoor Watermarkingcited by 30
- 2020Intellectual Property Protection for Deep Learning Models: Taxonomy, Methods, Attacks, and Evaluationscited by 30
- 2019BlackMarks: Blackbox Multibit Watermarking for Deep Neural Networkscited by 25
- 2022Cosine Model Watermarking Against Ensemble Distillationcited by 12
- 2020Locality-Sensitive Hashing Scheme based on Longest Circular Co-Substringcited by 11
- 2021Exploring Structure Consistency for Deep Model Watermarkingcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.