mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Provable Privacy Advantages of Decentralized Federated Learning via Distributed Optimization

arXiv 2407.09324 ↗First posted 12 Jul 2024cs.LG cs.AI cs.ITcited by 6

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Federated learning (FL) emerged as a paradigm designed to improve data privacy by enabling data to reside at its source, thus embedding privacy as a core consideration in FL architectures, whether centralized or decentralized. Contrasting with recent findings by Pasquini et al., which suggest that decentralized FL does not empirically offer any additional privacy or security benefits over centralized models, our study provides compelling evidence to the contrary. We demonstrate that decentralized FL, when deploying distributed optimization, provides enhanced privacy protection - both theoretically and empirically - compared to centralized approaches. The challenge of quantifying privacy loss through iterative processes has traditionally constrained the theoretical exploration of FL protocols. We overcome this by conducting a pioneering in-depth information-theoretical privacy analysis for both frameworks. Our analysis, considering both eavesdropping and passive adversary models, successfully establishes bounds on privacy leakage. We show information theoretically that the privacy loss in decentralized FL is upper bounded by the loss in centralized FL. Compared to the centralized case where local gradients of individual participants are directly revealed, a key distinction of optimization-based decentralized FL is that the relevant information includes differences of local gradients over successive iterations and the aggregated sum of different nodes' gradients over the network. This information complicates the adversary's attempt to infer private data. To bridge our theoretical insights with practical applications, we present detailed case studies involving logistic regression and deep neural networks. These examples demonstrate that while privacy leakage remains comparable in simpler models, complex models like deep neural networks exhibit lower privacy risks under decentralized FL.

Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 38 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Jul 2024.

Builds on

38 of 72 references.

References · 38

  1. 2016Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Datacited by 7,592
  2. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
  3. 2019Federated Learning: Challenges, Methods, and Future Directionscited by 1,531
  4. 2019Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 1,004
  5. 2020Inverting Gradients -- How easy is it to break privacy in federated learning?cited by 707
  6. 2018Exploiting Unintended Feature Leakage in Collaborative Learningcited by 509
  7. 2017Can Decentralized Algorithms Outperform Centralized Algorithms? A Case Study for Decentralized Parallel Stochastic Gradient Descentcited by 496
  8. 2020iDLG: Improved Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 367
  9. 2020A Unified Theory of Decentralized SGD with Changing Topology and Local Updatescited by 361
  10. 2021See through Gradients: Image Batch Recovery via GradInversioncited by 320
  11. 2020Systematic Evaluation of Privacy Risks of Machine Learning Modelscited by 273
  12. 2018Beyond Inferring Class Representatives: User-Level Privacy Leakage From Federated Learningcited by 242
26 more
  1. 2019The Secret Revealer: Generative Model-Inversion Attacks Against Deep Neural Networkscited by 241
  2. 2013On the Convergence of Decentralized Gradient Descentcited by 158
  3. 2018D2: Decentralized Training over Decentralized Datacited by 140
  4. 2021When the Curious Abandon Honesty: Federated Learning Is Not Privatecited by 126
  5. 2019Tightening Mutual Information Based Bounds on Generalization Errorcited by 117
  6. 2021Gradient Inversion with Generative Image Priorcited by 101
  7. 2019Decentralized Federated Learning: A Segmented Gossip Approachcited by 63
  8. 2020A Framework for Evaluating Gradient Leakage Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 63
  9. 2016Differential Privacy as a Mutual Information Constraintcited by 41
  10. 2021RelaySum for Decentralized Deep Learning on Heterogeneous Datacited by 39
  11. 2022On the (In)security of Peer-to-Peer Decentralized Machine Learningcited by 23
  12. 2020Information-Theoretic Bounds on the Generalization Error and Privacy Leakage in Federated Learningcited by 20
  13. 2020Layer-wise Characterization of Latent Information Leakage in Federated Learningcited by 19
  14. 2016How to scale distributed deep learning?cited by 16
  15. 2022AGIC: Approximate Gradient Inversion Attack on Federated Learningcited by 15
  16. 2017Distributed Optimization Using the Primal-Dual Method of Multiplierscited by 12
  17. 2021A Quantitative Metric for Privacy Leakage in Federated Learningcited by 12
  18. 2020Privacy-Preserving Distributed Optimization via Subspace Perturbation: A General Frameworkcited by 9
  19. 2022Deep Leakage from Model in Federated Learningcited by 9
  20. 2017Derivation and Analysis of the Primal-Dual Method of Multipliers Based on Monotone Operator Theorycited by 8
  21. 2020Privacy-Preserving Distributed Processing: Metrics, Bounds, and Algorithmscited by 8
  22. 2023Adaptive Differentially Quantized Subspace Perturbation (ADQSP): A Unified Framework for Privacy-Preserving Distributed Average Consensuscited by 6
  23. 2020Coded Stochastic ADMM for Decentralized Consensus Optimization with Edge Computingcited by 5
  24. 2021Communication efficient privacy-preserving distributed optimization using adaptive differential quantizationcited by 5
  25. 2019Communication-Censored Linearized ADMM for Decentralized Consensus Optimizationcited by 4
  26. 2019Information-theoretic metrics for Local Differential Privacy protocolscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 3.

6 papers.