DATABench: Evaluating Dataset Auditing in Deep Learning from an Adversarial Perspective
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The widespread application of Deep Learning across diverse domains hinges critically on the quality and composition of training datasets. However, the common lack of disclosure regarding their usage raises significant privacy and copyright concerns. Dataset auditing techniques, which aim to determine if a specific dataset was used to train a given suspicious model, provide promising solutions to addressing these transparency gaps. While prior work has developed various auditing methods, their resilience against dedicated adversarial attacks remains largely unexplored. To bridge the gap, this paper initiates a comprehensive study evaluating dataset auditing from an adversarial perspective. We start with introducing a novel taxonomy, classifying existing methods based on their reliance on internal features (IF) (inherent to the data) versus external features (EF) (artificially introduced for auditing). Subsequently, we formulate two primary attack types: evasion attacks, designed to conceal the use of a dataset, and forgery attacks, intending to falsely implicate an unused dataset. Building on the understanding of existing methods and attack objectives, we further propose systematic attack strategies: decoupling, removal, and detection for evasion; adversarial example-based methods for forgery. These formulations and strategies lead to our new benchmark, DATABench, comprising 17 evasion attacks, 5 forgery attacks, and 9 representative auditing methods. Extensive evaluations using DATABench reveal that none of the evaluated auditing methods are sufficiently robust or distinctive under adversarial settings. These findings underscore the urgent need for developing a more secure and reliable dataset auditing method capable of withstanding sophisticated adversarial manipulation. Code is available in https://github.com/shaoshuo-ss/DATABench.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 68 of its 104 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jul 2025.
Builds on
68 of 104 references.
References · 68
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
- 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,744
- 2020Denoising Diffusion Probabilistic Modelscited by 21,076
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
- 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
- 2018MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottleneckscited by 4,795
- 2016Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural Networkscited by 2,998
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,281
- 2019Certified Adversarial Robustness via Randomized Smoothingcited by 1,340
- 2017Targeted Backdoor Attacks on Deep Learning Systems Using Data Poisoningcited by 1,055
38 more
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 878
- 2017Ensemble Adversarial Training: Attacks and Defensescited by 840
- 2016Universal adversarial perturbationscited by 784
- 2021MobileViT: Light-weight, General-purpose, and Mobile-friendly Vision Transformercited by 642
- 2023End-to-end Autonomous Driving: Challenges and Frontierscited by 490
- 2019Evading Defenses to Transferable Adversarial Examples by Translation-Invariant Attackscited by 442
- 2021Enhancing the Transferability of Adversarial Attacks through Variance Tuningcited by 244
- 2024Do Membership Inference Attacks Work on Large Language Models?cited by 195
- 2021Unlearnable Examples: Making Personal Data Unexploitablecited by 193
- 2022Backdoor Defense via Decoupling the Training Processcited by 153
- 2023Are Diffusion Models Vulnerable to Membership Inference Attacks?cited by 136
- 2022Differentially Private Diffusion Modelscited by 119
- 2021Dataset Inference: Ownership Resolution in Machine Learningcited by 116
- 2023A Survey of Text Watermarking in the Era of Large Language Modelscited by 112
- 2024LLM Dataset Inference: Did you train on my dataset?cited by 110
- 2023SCALE-UP: An Efficient Black-box Input-level Backdoor Detection via Analyzing Scaled Prediction Consistencycited by 97
- 2022Untargeted Backdoor Watermark: Towards Harmless and Stealthy Dataset Copyright Protectioncited by 86
- 2021Backdoor Attack in the Physical Worldcited by 84
- 2023REMARK-LLM: A Robust and Efficient Watermarking Framework for Generative Large Language Modelscited by 78
- 2019Differentially Private Model Publishing for Deep Learningcited by 71
- 2021SoK: How Robust is Image Classification Deep Neural Network Watermarking? (Extended Version)cited by 69
- 2020Radioactive data: tracing through trainingcited by 67
- 2023DP-Forward: Fine-tuning and Inference on Language Models with Differential Privacy in Forward Passcited by 67
- 2022Black-box Dataset Ownership Verification via Backdoor Watermarkingcited by 65
- 2023Domain Watermark: Effective and Harmless Dataset Copyright Protection is Closed at Handcited by 57
- 2024SoK: Watermarking for AI-Generated Contentcited by 51
- 2023Backdoor Defense via Adaptively Splitting Poisoned Datasetcited by 43
- 2021Poison Forensics: Traceback of Data Poisoning Attacks in Neural Networkscited by 40
- 2024Proving membership in LLM pretraining data via data watermarkscited by 40
- 2024Explanation as a Watermark: Towards Harmless and Multi-bit Model Ownership Verification via Watermarking Feature Attributioncited by 40
- 2024IBD-PSC: Input-level Backdoor Detection via Parameter-oriented Scaling Consistencycited by 39
- 2024Copyright Protection in Generative AI: A Technical Perspectivecited by 38
- 2023Did You Train on My Dataset? Towards Public Dataset Protection with Clean-Label Backdoor Watermarkingcited by 37
- 2025Towards Label-Only Membership Inference Attack against Pre-trained Large Language Modelscited by 37
- 2022Dataset Inference for Self-Supervised Modelscited by 36
- 2025Membership Inference Attacks Against Vision-Language Modelscited by 29
- 2025REFINE: Inversion-Free Backdoor Defense via Model Reprogrammingcited by 22
- 2024Is Difficulty Calibration All We Need? Towards More Practical Membership Inference Attackscited by 21
50 most cited of 68 All 68 (JSON)
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 5; 2026: 3.
8 papers.
- 2025SoK: Large Language Model Copyright Auditing via Fingerprintingcited by 15
- 2025SWAP: Towards Copyright Auditing of Soft Prompts via Sequential Watermarkingcited by 3
- 2026Cert-LAS: Toward Certified Model Ownership Verification for Text-to-Image Diffusion Models via Layer-Adaptive Smoothingcited by 3
- 2025Evading Data Provenance in Deep Neural Networkscited by 2
- 2025External Data Extraction Attacks against Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2025DSSmoothing: Toward Certified Dataset Ownership Verification for Pre-trained Language Models via Dual-Space Smoothingcited by 2
- 2026X-Mark: Saliency-Guided Robust Dataset Ownership Verification for Medical Imagingcited by 1
- 2026Trustworthy synthetic visual media: Evidence across the media lifecyclecited by 0
- 2026Trustworthy synthetic visual media: Evidence across the media lifecycle28 Sep 2026
- 2026Cert-LAS: Toward Certified Model Ownership Verification for Text-to-Image Diffusion Models via Layer-Adaptive Smoothing28 May 2026
- 2026X-Mark: Saliency-Guided Robust Dataset Ownership Verification for Medical Imaging10 Feb 2026
- 2025SWAP: Towards Copyright Auditing of Soft Prompts via Sequential Watermarking5 Nov 2025
- 2025DSSmoothing: Toward Certified Dataset Ownership Verification for Pre-trained Language Models via Dual-Space Smoothing17 Oct 2025
- 2025External Data Extraction Attacks against Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models3 Oct 2025
- 2025SoK: Large Language Model Copyright Auditing via Fingerprinting27 Aug 2025
- 2025Evading Data Provenance in Deep Neural Networks1 Aug 2025