mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Fair Finetuning Mitigates Distribution Inference Attacks

arXiv 2606.01719 ↗First posted 1 Jun 2026cs.LG cs.AI cs.CRcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Machine learning models trained on sensitive data can inadvertently leak population-level information about their training distributions -- a threat known as distribution inference attack (DIA). An adversary with black-box access can infer sensitive demographic properties, such as subgroup proportions, without observing any training data directly. While defenses such as differential privacy and property unlearning have been proposed, the link between fairness constraints and distributional leakage remains unexplored. We propose Fair Fine-tuning (FFt): a trained model is fine-tuned on samples from the complementary distribution under an Equalized Odds (EO) constraint. We provide a complete theoretical characterization, proving the tight bound Adv(A,Mf) ≤ DeltaEO · W, where W quantifies how distinguishable the two training distributions are by their sensitive-attribute composition. We also establish a necessary condition for FFt to reduce adversarial advantage and prove tightness of the bound. We evaluate across six datasets spanning tabular (ACS Income, COMPAS, German Credit), image (UTKFaces), and NLP (Bias in Bios) modalities. Rehearsal-based FFt consistently reduces the adversarial accuracy gap below the detection threshold τ!=!0.1 across all settings; on ACS Income, the gap falls from ~!15% to under 4%. Our work provides the first formal bound connecting a model's measured EO disparity directly to its adversarial advantage in the DIA game, opening a new avenue for unified fairness-and-privacy defenses.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 24 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2026.

Builds on

11 of 24 references.

References · 11

  1. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
  2. 2021Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learningcited by 449
  3. 2017Age Progression/Regression by Conditional Adversarial Autoencodercited by 429
  4. 2021Opacus: User-Friendly Differential Privacy Library in PyTorchcited by 383
  5. 2019Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Settingcited by 349
  6. 2020On the Privacy Risks of Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 82
  7. 2022Pruning has a disparate impact on model accuracycited by 44
  8. 2022Distribution inference risks: Identifying and mitigating sources of leakagecited by 17
  9. 2024Inf2Guard: An Information-Theoretic Framework for Learning Privacy-Preserving Representations against Inference Attackscited by 13
  10. 2024Robust Federated Learning Mitigates Client-side Training Data Distribution Inference Attackscited by 11
  11. 2021Privacy Inference Attacks and Defenses in Cloud-based Deep Neural Network: A Surveycited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023When Fairness Meets Privacy: Exploring Privacy Threats in Fair Binary Classifiers via Membership Inference Attacks
  2. 2025Fairness and Robustness in Machine Unlearning
  3. 2026Privacy Cost as Equity Input: A Group Fairness Criterion for Differentially Private Machine Learning
  4. 2025Do Fairness Interventions Come at the Cost of Privacy: Evaluations for Binary Classifiers
  5. 2023Towards Poisoning Fair Representations
  6. 2026Provable Robustness against Backdoor Attacks via the Primal-Dual Perspective on Differential Privacy
  7. 2026FairDiffuseVQVAE: Sampling-Time Fairness in Tabular Diffusion via Conditional Refinement of Vector-Quantized Latents
  8. 2024Defending Membership Inference Attacks via Privacy-aware Sparsity Tuning