mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Lost in the Averages: A New Specific Setup to Evaluate Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning Models

arXiv 2405.15423 ↗First posted 24 May 2024cs.LG cs.CRcited by 0

On the map: LLM safety and security → Membership inference attacks

Abstract (arXiv)

Synthetic data generators and machine learning models can memorize their training data, posing privacy concerns. Membership inference attacks (MIAs) are a standard method of estimating the privacy risk of these systems. The risk of individual records is typically computed by evaluating MIAs in a record-specific privacy game. We analyze the record-specific privacy game commonly used for evaluating attackers under realistic assumptions (the textittraditional game) -- particularly for synthetic tabular data -- and show that it averages a record's privacy risk across datasets. We show this implicitly assumes the dataset a record is part of has no impact on the record's risk, providing a misleading risk estimate when a specific model or synthetic dataset is released. Instead, we propose a novel use of the leave-one-out game, used in existing work exclusively to audit differential privacy guarantees, and call this the textitmodel-seeded game. We formalize it and show that it provides an accurate estimate of the privacy risk posed by a given adversary for a record in its specific dataset. We instantiate and evaluate the state-of-the-art MIA for synthetic data generators in the traditional and model-seeded privacy games, and show across multiple datasets and models that the two privacy games indeed result in different risk scores, with up to 94% of high-risk records being overlooked by the traditional game. We further show that records in smaller datasets and models not protected by strong differential privacy guarantees tend to have a larger gap between risk estimates. Taken together, our results show that the model-seeded setup yields a risk estimate specific to a certain model or synthetic dataset released and in line with the standard notion of privacy leakage from prior work, meaningfully different from the dataset-averaged risk provided by the traditional privacy game.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Membership inference attacks, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 31 of its 58 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 May 2024.

Builds on

31 of 58 references.

Closest ancestors · 7

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Low-Cost High-Power Membership Inference Attacks6 Dec
  2. 2023White-box Membership Inference Attacks against Diffusion Models11 Aug
  3. 2023Synthetic is all you need: removing the auxiliary data assumption for membership inference attacks against synthetic data4 Jul
  4. 2023Membership Inference Attacks against Diffusion Models7 Feb
  5. 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principles7 Dec
  6. 2021Enhanced Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Models18 Nov
  7. 2021On the Importance of Difficulty Calibration in Membership Inference Attacks15 Nov

Other references · 24

  1. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
  2. 2019Modeling Tabular data using Conditional GANcited by 695
  3. 2019Does Learning Require Memorization? A Short Tale about a Long Tailcited by 452
  4. 2020Label-Only Membership Inference Attackscited by 371
  5. 2013The Composition Theorem for Differential Privacycited by 290
  6. 2020Systematic Evaluation of Privacy Risks of Machine Learning Modelscited by 273
  7. 2019White-box vs Black-box: Bayes Optimal Strategies for Membership Inferencecited by 265
  8. 2018Beyond Inferring Class Representatives: User-Level Privacy Leakage From Federated Learningcited by 242
  9. 2020Auditing Differentially Private Machine Learning: How Private is Private SGD?cited by 213
  10. 2021Adversary Instantiation: Lower Bounds for Differentially Private Machine Learningcited by 193
  11. 2022Reconstructing Training Data with Informed Adversariescited by 143
  12. 2022The Privacy Onion Effect: Memorization is Relativecited by 128
12 more
  1. 2020Revisiting Membership Inference Under Realistic Assumptionscited by 108
  2. 2020Synthetic Data -- Anonymisation Groundhog Daycited by 105
  3. 2020ML Privacy Meter: Aiding Regulatory Compliance by Quantifying the Privacy Risks of Machine Learningcited by 66
  4. 2017Knock Knock, Who's There? Membership Inference on Aggregate Location Datacited by 63
  5. 2022TAPAS: a Toolbox for Adversarial Privacy Auditing of Synthetic Datacited by 56
  6. 2022SoK: Let the Privacy Games Begin! A Unified Treatment of Data Inference Privacy in Machine Learningcited by 47
  7. 2022Debugging Differential Privacy: A Case Study for Privacy Auditingcited by 39
  8. 2019Disparate Vulnerability to Membership Inference Attackscited by 33
  9. 2023Achilles' Heels: Vulnerable Record Identification in Synthetic Data Publishingcited by 28
  10. 2023A Linear Reconstruction Approach for Attribute Inference Attacks against Synthetic Datacited by 23
  11. 2024"What do you want from theory alone?" Experimenting with Tight Auditing of Differentially Private Synthetic Data Generationcited by 20
  12. 2023Investigating the Effect of Misalignment on Membership Privacy in the White-box Settingcited by 9

Built on by

Not cited yet.