CoLA: A Choice Leakage Attack Framework to Expose Privacy Risks in Subset Training
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Training models on a carefully chosen portion of data rather than the full dataset is now a standard preprocess for modern ML. From vision coreset selection to large-scale filtering in language models, it enables scalability with minimal utility loss. A common intuition is that training on fewer samples should also reduce privacy risks. In this paper, we challenge this assumption. We show that subset training is not privacy free: the very choices of which data are included or excluded can introduce new privacy surface and leak more sensitive information. Such information can be captured by adversaries either through side-channel metadata from the subset selection process or via the outputs of the target model. To systematically study this phenomenon, we propose CoLA (Choice Leakage Attack), a unified framework for analyzing privacy leakage in subset selection. In CoLA, depending on the adversary's knowledge of the side-channel information, we define two practical attack scenarios: Subset-aware Side-channel Attacks and Black-box Attacks. Under both scenarios, we investigate two privacy surfaces unique to subset training: (1) Training-membership MIA (TM-MIA), which concerns only the privacy of training data membership, and (2) Selection-participation MIA (SP-MIA), which concerns the privacy of all samples that participated in the subset selection process. Notably, SP-MIA enlarges the notion of membership from model training to the entire data-model supply chain. Experiments on vision and language models show that existing threat models underestimate subset-training privacy risks: the expanded privacy surface leaks both training and selection membership, extending risks from individual models to the broader ML ecosystem.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 39 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Apr 2026.
Builds on
39 of 59 references.
References · 39
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
- 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
- 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
- 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,734
- 2021Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gophercited by 1,199
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 839
- 2021Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Bettercited by 705
- 2018An Empirical Study of Example Forgetting during Deep Neural Network Learningcited by 669
- 2021Deep Learning on a Data Diet: Finding Important Examples Early in Trainingcited by 529
- 2022Beyond neural scaling laws: beating power law scaling via data pruningcited by 519
27 more
- 2018ML-Leaks: Model and Data Independent Membership Inference Attacks and Defenses on Machine Learning Modelscited by 475
- 2019Selection via Proxy: Efficient Data Selection for Deep Learningcited by 337
- 2021GRAD-MATCH: Gradient Matching based Data Subset Selection for Efficient Deep Model Trainingcited by 269
- 2020GLISTER: Generalization based Data Subset Selection for Efficient and Robust Learningcited by 224
- 2018Machine Learning with Membership Privacy using Adversarial Regularizationcited by 177
- 2018Adversarial Active Learning for Deep Networks: a Margin Based Approachcited by 155
- 2021Active Learning by Acquiring Contrastive Examplescited by 154
- 2024QuRating: Selecting High-Quality Data for Training Language Modelscited by 153
- 2020Contextual Diversity for Active Learningcited by 139
- 2020Augmented SBERT: Data Augmentation Method for Improving Bi-Encoders for Pairwise Sentence Scoring Taskscited by 136
- 2022Privacy for Free: How does Dataset Condensation Help Privacy?cited by 119
- 2019Membership Inference Attacks on Sequence-to-Sequence Models: Is My Data In Your Machine Translation System?cited by 68
- 2023Data Pruning via Moving-one-Sample-outcited by 67
- 2023Membership Inference Attacks against Synthetic Data through Overfitting Detectioncited by 66
- 2018On Coresets for Logistic Regressioncited by 65
- 2024SoK: Membership Inference Attacks on LLMs are Rushing Nowhere (and How to Fix It)cited by 54
- 2021A New Coreset Framework for Clusteringcited by 38
- 2024Data Contamination Calibration for Black-box LLMscited by 23
- 2025Vid-SME: Membership Inference Attacks against Large Video Understanding Modelscited by 17
- 2025Synthesizing Privacy-Preserving Text Data via Finetuning without Finetuning Billion-Scale LLMscited by 15
- 2025Towards User-level Private Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedbackcited by 13
- 2025Does Training with Synthetic Data Truly Protect Privacy?cited by 12
- 2025Mechanistic Unveiling of Transformer Circuits: Self-Influence as a Key to Model Reasoningcited by 11
- 2025Towards Lifecycle Unlearning Commitment Management: Measuring Sample-level Unlearning Completenesscited by 11
- 2024Dissecting Representation Misalignment in Contrastive Learning via Influence Functioncited by 7
- 2025Evaluating Data Influence in Meta Learningcited by 4
- 2025Attributing Data for Sharpness-Aware Minimizationcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.