Adversarial Vulnerability Transcends Computational Paradigms: Feature Engineering Provides No Defense Against Neural Adversarial Transfer
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep neural networks are vulnerable to adversarial examples--inputs with imperceptible perturbations causing misclassification. While adversarial transfer within neural networks is well-documented, whether classical ML pipelines using handcrafted features inherit this vulnerability when attacked via neural surrogates remains unexplored. Feature engineering creates information bottlenecks through gradient quantization and spatial binning, potentially filtering high-frequency adversarial signals. We evaluate this hypothesis through the first comprehensive study of adversarial transfer from DNNs to HOG-based classifiers. Using VGG16 as a surrogate, we generate FGSM and PGD adversarial examples and test transfer to four classical classifiers (KNN, Decision Tree, Linear SVM, Kernel SVM) and a shallow neural network across eight HOG configurations on CIFAR-10. Our results strongly refute the protective hypothesis: all classifiers suffer 16.6%-59.1% relative accuracy drops, comparable to neural-to-neural transfer. More surprisingly, we discover attack hierarchy reversal--contrary to patterns where iterative PGD dominates FGSM within neural networks, FGSM causes greater degradation than PGD in 100% of classical ML cases, suggesting iterative attacks overfit to surrogate-specific features that don't survive feature extraction. Block normalization provides partial but insufficient mitigation. These findings demonstrate that adversarial vulnerability is not an artifact of end-to-end differentiability but a fundamental property of image classification systems, with implications for security-critical deployments across computational paradigms.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 19 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jan 2026.
Builds on
9 of 19 references.
References · 9
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,364
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,364
- 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,415
- 2021On the Robustness of Vision Transformers to Adversarial Examplescited by 167
- 2020Backpropagating Linearly Improves Transferability of Adversarial Examplescited by 79
- 2020PatchAttack: A Black-box Texture-based Attack with Reinforcement Learningcited by 67
- 2021Closer Look at the Transferability of Adversarial Examples: How They Fool Different Models Differentlycited by 22
- 2017Learning Universal Adversarial Perturbations with Generative Modelscited by 4
- 2024Improving Transferable Targeted Adversarial Attack via Normalized Logit Calibration and Truncated Feature Mixingcited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Properties that allow or prohibit transferability of adversarial attacks among quantized networks
- 2023Improving Adversarial Transferability by Stable Diffusion
- 2023Rethinking Model Ensemble in Transfer-based Adversarial Attacks
- 2025Understanding Adversarial Transfer: Why Representation-Space Attacks Fail Where Data-Space Attacks Succeed
- 2025Adversarial Attacks Leverage Interference Between Features in Superposition
- 2024Breaking Barriers in Physical-World Adversarial Examples: Improving Robustness and Transferability via Robust Feature
- 2023Adversarial defense based on distribution transfer
- 2022Similarity of Neural Architectures using Adversarial Attack Transferability