Privacy Failure in Split-LLM Training, The Returned Gradient Nullifies the Decoys
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We present a systems-security case study of a two-node split-LLM training system whose privacy evaluation passed while leaving an observable channel untested. The Trusted Local Node (TLN) sends protected activations to the Untrusted Cloud Node (UCN), the UCN returns its output, and TLN, holding the private loss, returns the output gradient. The frame the UCN receives mixes real rows with decoys, and the loss ignores the decoys. Their gradients are exactly zero, so the pattern of zeros reveals which rows were real. We measure it with a protocol fixed in advance: a leak injected at known strength to prove the instrument can see one, a shuffled-label control to prove it does not report absent leaks, and a threshold set before the runs. Across nine seeds, the zeros identified the real rows on every frame, 4,096 of 4,096 per run. An attack on the frame contents recovered about one extra token per hundred over a constant-guess baseline (+0.65 to +1.50 percentage points); the shuffled controls recovered nothing. A second set of runs repeated this on a configuration that keeps model quality within budget, so the finding is not confined to a setting nobody would deploy. On both datasets, every such run passed the forward-channel privacy check and the quality check, yet failed that same check once the returned gradient was included. Clipping and noising each row of the gradient closed the leak for about 0.01 nats of held-out cross-entropy. The system is not thereby safe: five classes of attack, including those accumulating observations across training steps, were never measured.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Sep 2026.
Builds on
26 of 35 references.
References · 26
- 2019Deep Leakage from Gradientscited by 1,021
- 2021Membership Inference Attacks From First Principlescited by 878
- 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 864
- 2018Split learning for health: Distributed deep learning without sharing raw patient datacited by 395
- 2020Systematic Evaluation of Privacy Risks of Machine Learning Modelscited by 292
- 2020Auditing Differentially Private Machine Learning: How Private is Private SGD?cited by 218
- 2023Privacy Auditing with One (1) Training Runcited by 123
- 2020Unleashing the Tiger: Inference Attacks on Split Learningcited by 105
- 2021Label Leakage and Protection in Two-party Split Learningcited by 90
- 2022Recovering Private Text in Federated Learning of Language Modelscited by 70
- 2021TAG: Gradient Attack on Transformer-based Language Modelscited by 63
- 2022LAMP: Extracting Text from Gradients with Language Model Priorscited by 54
14 more
- 2021UnSplit: Data-Oblivious Model Inversion, Model Stealing, and Label Inference Attacks Against Split Learningcited by 52
- 2023PUMA: Secure Inference of LLaMA-7B in Five Minutescited by 48
- 2023Unleashing the Power of Randomization in Auditing Differentially Private MLcited by 20
- 2024Unveiling the Vulnerability of Private Fine-Tuning in Split-Based Frameworks for Large Language Models: A Bidirectionally Enhanced Attackcited by 18
- 2025TOPLOC: A Locality Sensitive Hashing Scheme for Trustless Verifiable Inferencecited by 17
- 2025Depth Gives a False Sense of Privacy: LLM Internal States Inversioncited by 17
- 2024PermLLM: Private Inference of Large Language Models within 3 Seconds under WANcited by 14
- 2025Prompt Inference Attack on Distributed Large Language Model Inference Frameworkscited by 14
- 2023Privacy Assessment on Reconstructed Images: Are Existing Evaluation Metrics Faithful to Human Perception?cited by 13
- 2024Confidential Computing on NVIDIA Hopper GPUs: A Performance Benchmark Studycited by 8
- 2025VFLAIR-LLM: A Comprehensive Framework and Benchmark for Split Learning of LLMscited by 5
- 2019Lightweight and Unobtrusive Data Obfuscation at IoT Edge for Remote Inferencecited by 3
- 2026From Prompts to Responses: Dual-Sided Data Leakage and Defense in Split Large Language Modelscited by 2
- 2026The Art of Mixology: Mixup-based Obfuscation for Privacy-Preserving Split Learning in Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.