Evaluating Efficacy of Model Stealing Attacks and Defenses on Quantum Neural Networks
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Cloud hosting of quantum machine learning (QML) models exposes them to a range of vulnerabilities, the most significant of which is the model stealing attack. In this study, we assess the efficacy of such attacks in the realm of quantum computing. We conducted comprehensive experiments on various datasets with multiple QML model architectures. Our findings revealed that model stealing attacks can produce clone models achieving up to 0.9× and 0.99× clone test accuracy when trained using Top-1 and Top-k labels, respectively (k: numclasses). To defend against these attacks, we leverage the unique properties of current noisy hardware and perturb the victim model outputs and hinder the attacker's training process. In particular, we propose: 1) hardware variation-induced perturbation (HVIP) and 2) hardware and architecture variation-induced perturbation (HAVIP). Although noise and architectural variability can provide up to ~16% output obfuscation, our comprehensive analysis revealed that models cloned under noisy conditions tend to be resilient, suffering little to no performance degradation due to such obfuscations. Despite limited success with our defense techniques, this outcome has led to an important discovery: QML models trained on noisy hardwares are naturally resistant to perturbation or obfuscation-based defenses or attacks.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Feb 2024.
Builds on
8 of 19 references.
References · 8
- 2016Stealing Machine Learning Models via Prediction APIscited by 619
- 2020The power of quantum neural networkscited by 379
- 2020MAZE: Data-Free Model Stealing Attack Using Zeroth-Order Gradient Estimationcited by 99
- 2019Reverse-Engineering Deep ReLU Networkscited by 83
- 2022I Know What You Trained Last Summer: A Survey on Stealing Machine Learning Models and Defencescited by 75
- 2019Defending Against Model Stealing Attacks with Adaptive Misinformationcited by 57
- 2021Quantum-Classical Hybrid Machine Learning for Image Classification (ICCAD Special Session Paper)cited by 14
- 2017Data Driven Exploratory Attacks on Black Box Classifiers in Adversarial Domainscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 3; 2025: 2; 2026: 1.
6 papers.
- 2024STIQ: Safeguarding Training and Inferencing of Quantum Neural Networks from Untrusted Cloudcited by 3
- 2024The Quantum Imitation Game: Reverse Engineering of Quantum Machine Learning Modelscited by 3
- 2025SoK: Critical Evaluation of Quantum Machine Learning for Adversarial Robustnesscited by 3
- 2024Security Concerns in Quantum Machine Learning as a Servicecited by 2
- 2025Adversarial Threats in Quantum Machine Learning: A Survey of Attacks and Defensescited by 1
- 2026Characterizing Privacy Risks of Quantum Machine Learning with Emergent Quantum-Native Accesscited by 0
- 2026Characterizing Privacy Risks of Quantum Machine Learning with Emergent Quantum-Native Access4 Sep 2026
- 2025SoK: Critical Evaluation of Quantum Machine Learning for Adversarial Robustness19 Nov 2025
- 2025Adversarial Threats in Quantum Machine Learning: A Survey of Attacks and Defenses27 Jun 2025
- 2024Security Concerns in Quantum Machine Learning as a Service18 Aug 2024
- 2024The Quantum Imitation Game: Reverse Engineering of Quantum Machine Learning Models9 Jul 2024
- 2024STIQ: Safeguarding Training and Inferencing of Quantum Neural Networks from Untrusted Cloud29 May 2024