IntraShuffler: A Privacy Preserving Framework for Heterogeneous DP Federated Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Heterogeneous Differential Privacy (HDP) in Federated Learning (FL) allows clients to select individual privacy budgets (varepsiloni) according to institutional policies and data sensitivity. In practice, many HDP-FL systems employ varepsilon-aware server aggregation to improve model utility by re-weighting client updates according to their declared privacy budgets. However, gradient updates in FL retain structural patterns induced by non-independent and identically-distributed (non-IID) data, and these additional signals exposed by varepsilon-aware aggregation create new opportunities for inference by an honest-but-curious server. In this work, we first show that a server equipped with gradient denoising and surrogate modeling can mount a Privacy Inference Attack that infers distributional attributes of clients and links updates from the same client across training rounds, measured via surrogate inference accuracy and linkage success, under realistic knowledge constraints. The Shuffle-Model has been widely studied as a defense against such inference risks by anonymizing update sources, but it is fundamentally incompatible with HDP-FL varepsilon-aware aggregation. To address this challenge, we propose IntraShuffler, a middleware defense framework designed for HDP-FL systems. IntraShuffler introduces a privacy-aware shuffling mechanism that groups clients into privacy-compatible buckets and performs parameter-level shuffling within each bucket to disrupt persistent gradient structure while preserving varepsilon-aware aggregation. Experiments across four different datasets show that IntraShuffler reduces gradient recoverability by over 60% and decreases surrogate inference accuracy from 0.78 to 0.33 while maintaining comparable model utility across multiple FL aggregation rules.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Jun 2026.
Builds on
18 of 34 references.
References · 18
- 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,682
- 2019Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 1,004
- 2020Inverting Gradients -- How easy is it to break privacy in federated learning?cited by 707
- 2019Federated Learning with Differential Privacy: Algorithms and Performance Analysiscited by 528
- 2018Exploiting Unintended Feature Leakage in Collaborative Learningcited by 509
- 2018Amplification by Shuffling: From Local to Central Differential Privacy via Anonymitycited by 163
- 2018Distributed Differential Privacy via Shufflingcited by 115
- 2021Federated Learning: Opportunities and Challengescited by 83
- 2021Source Inference Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 31
- 2020FLAME: Differentially Private Federated Learning in the Shuffle Modelcited by 27
- 2021Differential Privacy in the Shuffle Model: A Survey of Separationscited by 14
- 2023Source Inference Attacks: Beyond Membership Inference Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 10
6 more
- 2021Federated Learning with Heterogeneous Differential Privacycited by 5
- 2015Riposte: An Anonymous Messaging System Handling Millions of Userscited by 4
- 2023Echo of Neighbors: Privacy Amplification for Personalized Private Federated Learning with Shuffle Modelcited by 4
- 2024The Power of Bias: Optimizing Client Selection in Federated Learning with Heterogeneous Differential Privacycited by 2
- 2025Optimal Client Sampling in Federated Learning with Client-Level Heterogeneous Differential Privacycited by 1
- 2026Protection against Source Inference Attacks in Federated Learningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.