mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Towards Understanding and Enhancing Security of Proof-of-Training for DNN Model Ownership Verification

arXiv 2410.04397 ↗First posted 6 Oct 2024cs.CR cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The great economic values of deep neural networks (DNNs) urge AI enterprises to protect their intellectual property (IP) for these models. Recently, proof-of-training (PoT) has been proposed as a promising solution to DNN IP protection, through which AI enterprises can utilize the record of DNN training process as their ownership proof. To prevent attackers from forging ownership proof, a secure PoT scheme should be able to distinguish honest training records from those forged by attackers. Although existing PoT schemes provide various distinction criteria, these criteria are based on intuitions or observations. The effectiveness of these criteria lacks clear and comprehensive analysis, resulting in existing schemes initially deemed secure being swiftly compromised by simple ideas. In this paper, we make the first move to identify distinction criteria in the style of formal methods, so that their effectiveness can be explicitly demonstrated. Specifically, we conduct systematic modeling to cover a wide range of attacks and then theoretically analyze the distinctions between honest and forged training records. The analysis results not only induce a universal distinction criterion, but also provide detailed reasoning to demonstrate its effectiveness in defending against attacks covered by our model. Guided by the criterion, we propose a generic PoT construction that can be instantiated into concrete schemes. This construction sheds light on the realization that trajectory matching algorithms, previously employed in data distillation, possess significant advantages in PoT construction. Experimental results demonstrate that our scheme can resist attacks that have compromised existing PoT schemes, which corroborates its superiority in security.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Oct 2024.

Builds on

17 of 29 references.

References · 17

  1. 2023A Survey of Large Language Modelscited by 2,537
  2. 2018MINE: Mutual Information Neural Estimationcited by 680
  3. 2022Dataset Distillation by Matching Training Trajectoriescited by 437
  4. 2018Knockoff Nets: Stealing Functionality of Black-Box Modelscited by 285
  5. 2017Embedding Watermarks into Deep Neural Networkscited by 227
  6. 2022Scaling Up Dataset Distillation to ImageNet-1K with Constant Memorycited by 180
  7. 2023Towards Lossless Dataset Distillation via Difficulty-Aligned Trajectory Matchingcited by 118
  8. 2018Stealing Hyperparameters in Machine Learningcited by 115
  9. 2019Deep Neural Network Fingerprinting by Conferrable Adversarial Examplescited by 90
  10. 2021Proof-of-Learning: Definitions and Practicecited by 81
  11. 2022I Know What You Trained Last Summer: A Survey on Stealing Machine Learning Models and Defencescited by 75
  12. 2023zkDL: Efficient Zero-Knowledge Proofs of Deep Learning Trainingcited by 20
5 more
  1. 2021"Adversarial Examples" for Proof-of-Learningcited by 19
  2. 2022Free Fine-tuning: A Plug-and-Play Watermarking Scheme for Deep Neural Networkscited by 14
  3. 2022Proof-of-Learning is Currently More Broken Than You Thinkcited by 12
  4. 2023Towards Robust Model Watermark via Reducing Parametric Vulnerabilitycited by 10
  5. 2021A Survey of Practical Formal Methods for Securitycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.