In this work, we investigate \textit{texture learning}: the identification of textures learned by object classification models, and the extent to which they rely on these textures. We build texture-object associations that uncover new insights about the relationships between texture and object classes in CNNs and find three classes of results: associations that are strong and expected, strong and not expected, and expected but not present. Our analysis demonstrates that investigations in texture learning enable new methods for interpretability and have the potential to uncover unexpected biases.
Large Language Model (LLM) systems are inherently compositional, with individual LLM serving as the core foundation with additional layers of objects such as plugins, sandbox, and so on. Along with the great potential, there are also increasing concerns over the security of such probabilistic intelligent systems. However, existing studies on LLM security often focus on individual LLM, but without examining the ecosystem through the lens of LLM systems with other objects (e.g., Frontend, Webtool, Sandbox, and so on). In this paper, we systematically analyze the security of LLM systems, instead of focusing on the individual LLMs. To do so, we build on top of the information flow and formulate the security of LLM systems as constraints on the alignment of the information flow within LLM and between LLM and other objects. Based on this construction and the unique probabilistic nature of LLM, the attack surface of the LLM system can be decomposed into three key components: (1) multi-layer security analysis, (2) analysis of the existence of constraints, and (3) analysis of the robustness of these constraints. To ground this new attack surface, we propose a multi-layer and multi-step approach and apply it to the state-of-art LLM system, OpenAI GPT4. Our investigation exposes several security issues, not just within the LLM model itself but also in its integration with other components. We found that although the OpenAI GPT4 has designed numerous safety constraints to improve its safety features, these safety constraints are still vulnerable to attackers. To further demonstrate the real-world threats of our discovered vulnerabilities, we construct an end-to-end attack where an adversary can illicitly acquire the user's chat history, all without the need to manipulate the user's input or gain direct access to OpenAI GPT4. Our demo is in the link: https://fzwark.github.io/LLM-System-Attack-Demo/
Despite the general capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 and Llama-2, these models still request fine-tuning or adaptation with customized data when it comes to meeting the specific business demands and intricacies of tailored use cases. However, this process inevitably introduces new safety threats, particularly against the Fine-tuning based Jailbreak Attack (FJAttack), where incorporating just a few harmful examples into the fine-tuning dataset can significantly compromise the model safety. Though potential defenses have been proposed by incorporating safety examples into the fine-tuning dataset to reduce the safety issues, such approaches require incorporating a substantial amount of safety examples, making it inefficient. To effectively defend against the FJAttack with limited safety examples, we propose a Backdoor Enhanced Safety Alignment method inspired by an analogy with the concept of backdoor attacks. In particular, we construct prefixed safety examples by integrating a secret prompt, acting as a "backdoor trigger", that is prefixed to safety examples. Our comprehensive experiments demonstrate that through the Backdoor Enhanced Safety Alignment with adding as few as 11 prefixed safety examples, the maliciously fine-tuned LLMs will achieve similar safety performance as the original aligned models. Furthermore, we also explore the effectiveness of our method in a more practical setting where the fine-tuning data consists of both FJAttack examples and the fine-tuning task data. Our method shows great efficacy in defending against FJAttack without harming the performance of fine-tuning tasks.
Today, the security of many domains rely on the use of Machine Learning to detect threats, identify vulnerabilities, and safeguard systems from attacks. Recently, transformer architectures have improved the state-of-the-art performance on a wide range of tasks such as malware detection and network intrusion detection. But, before abandoning current approaches to transformers, it is crucial to understand their properties and implications on cybersecurity applications. In this paper, we evaluate the robustness of transformers to adversarial samples for system defenders (i.e., resiliency to adversarial perturbations generated on different types of architectures) and their adversarial strength for system attackers (i.e., transferability of adversarial samples generated by transformers to other target models). To that effect, we first fine-tune a set of pre-trained transformer, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), and hybrid (an ensemble of transformer and CNN) models to solve different downstream image-based tasks. Then, we use an attack algorithm to craft 19,367 adversarial examples on each model for each task. The transferability of these adversarial examples is measured by evaluating each set on other models to determine which models offer more adversarial strength, and consequently, more robustness against these attacks. We find that the adversarial examples crafted on transformers offer the highest transferability rate (i.e., 25.7% higher than the average) onto other models. Similarly, adversarial examples crafted on other models have the lowest rate of transferability (i.e., 56.7% lower than the average) onto transformers. Our work emphasizes the importance of studying transformer architectures for attacking and defending models in security domains, and suggests using them as the primary architecture in transfer attack settings.
Adversarial examples, inputs designed to induce worst-case behavior in machine learning models, have been extensively studied over the past decade. Yet, our understanding of this phenomenon stems from a rather fragmented pool of knowledge; at present, there are a handful of attacks, each with disparate assumptions in threat models and incomparable definitions of optimality. In this paper, we propose a systematic approach to characterize worst-case (i.e., optimal) adversaries. We first introduce an extensible decomposition of attacks in adversarial machine learning by atomizing attack components into surfaces and travelers. With our decomposition, we enumerate over components to create 576 attacks (568 of which were previously unexplored). Next, we propose the Pareto Ensemble Attack (PEA): a theoretical attack that upper-bounds attack performance. With our new attacks, we measure performance relative to the PEA on: both robust and non-robust models, seven datasets, and three extended lp-based threat models incorporating compute costs, formalizing the Space of Adversarial Strategies. From our evaluation we find that attack performance to be highly contextual: the domain, model robustness, and threat model can have a profound influence on attack efficacy. Our investigation suggests that future studies measuring the security of machine learning should: (1) be contextualized to the domain & threat models, and (2) go beyond the handful of known attacks used today.
Planning algorithms are used in computational systems to direct autonomous behavior. In a canonical application, for example, planning for autonomous vehicles is used to automate the static or continuous planning towards performance, resource management, or functional goals (e.g., arriving at the destination, managing fuel fuel consumption). Existing planning algorithms assume non-adversarial settings; a least-cost plan is developed based on available environmental information (i.e., the input instance). Yet, it is unclear how such algorithms will perform in the face of adversaries attempting to thwart the planner. In this paper, we explore the security of planning algorithms used in cyber- and cyber-physical systems. We present two $\textit{adversarial planning}$ algorithms-one static and one adaptive-that perturb input planning instances to maximize cost (often substantially so). We evaluate the performance of the algorithms against two dominant planning algorithms used in commercial applications (D* Lite and Fast Downward) and show both are vulnerable to extremely limited adversarial action. Here, experiments show that an adversary is able to increase plan costs in 66.9% of instances by only removing a single action from the actions space (D* Lite) and render 70% of instances from an international planning competition unsolvable by removing only three actions (Fast Forward). Finally, we show that finding an optimal perturbation in any search-based planning system is NP-hard.
Geomagnetic storms, disturbances of Earth's magnetosphere caused by masses of charged particles being emitted from the Sun, are an uncontrollable threat to modern technology. Notably, they have the potential to damage satellites and cause instability in power grids on Earth, among other disasters. They result from high sun activity, which are induced from cool areas on the Sun known as sunspots. Forecasting the storms to prevent disasters requires an understanding of how and when they will occur. However, current prediction methods at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are limited in that they depend on expensive solar wind spacecraft and a global-scale magnetometer sensor network. In this paper, we introduce a novel machine learning and computer vision approach to accurately forecast geomagnetic storms without the need of such costly physical measurements. Our approach extracts features from images of the Sun to establish correlations between sunspots and geomagnetic storm classification and is competitive with NOAA's predictions. Indeed, our prediction achieves a 76% storm classification accuracy. This paper serves as an existence proof that machine learning and computer vision techniques provide an effective means for augmenting and improving existing geomagnetic storm forecasting methods.
One of the principal uses of physical-space sensors in public safety applications is the detection of unsafe conditions (e.g., release of poisonous gases, weapons in airports, tainted food). However, current detection methods in these applications are often costly, slow to use, and can be inaccurate in complex, changing, or new environments. In this paper, we explore how machine learning methods used successfully in cyber domains, such as malware detection, can be leveraged to substantially enhance physical space detection. We focus on one important exemplar application--the detection and localization of radioactive materials. We show that the ML-based approaches can significantly exceed traditional table-based approaches in predicting angular direction. Moreover, the developed models can be expanded to include approximations of the distance to radioactive material (a critical dimension that reference tables used in practice do not capture). With four and eight detector arrays, we collect counts of gamma-rays as features for a suite of machine learning models to localize radioactive material. We explore seven unique scenarios via simulation frameworks frequently used for radiation detection and with physical experiments using radioactive material in laboratory environments. We observe that our approach can outperform the standard table-based method, reducing the angular error by 37% and reliably predicting distance within 2.4%. In this way, we show that advances in cyber-detection provide substantial opportunities for enhancing detection in public safety applications and beyond.
Machine Learning is becoming a pivotal aspect of many systems today, offering newfound performance on classification and prediction tasks, but this rapid integration also comes with new unforeseen vulnerabilities. To harden these systems the ever-growing field of Adversarial Machine Learning has proposed new attack and defense mechanisms. However, a great asymmetry exists as these defensive methods can only provide security to certain models and lack scalability, computational efficiency, and practicality due to overly restrictive constraints. Moreover, newly introduced attacks can easily bypass defensive strategies by making subtle alterations. In this paper, we study an alternate approach inspired by honeypots to detect adversaries. Our approach yields learned models with an embedded watermark. When an adversary initiates an interaction with our model, attacks are encouraged to add this predetermined watermark stimulating detection of adversarial examples. We show that HoneyModels can reveal 69.5% of adversaries attempting to attack a Neural Network while preserving the original functionality of the model. HoneyModels offer an alternate direction to secure Machine Learning that slightly affects the accuracy while encouraging the creation of watermarked adversarial samples detectable by the HoneyModel but indistinguishable from others for the adversary.
Machine learning is vulnerable to adversarial examples-inputs designed to cause models to perform poorly. However, it is unclear if adversarial examples represent realistic inputs in the modeled domains. Diverse domains such as networks and phishing have domain constraints-complex relationships between features that an adversary must satisfy for an attack to be realized (in addition to any adversary-specific goals). In this paper, we explore how domain constraints limit adversarial capabilities and how adversaries can adapt their strategies to create realistic (constraint-compliant) examples. In this, we develop techniques to learn domain constraints from data, and show how the learned constraints can be integrated into the adversarial crafting process. We evaluate the efficacy of our approach in network intrusion and phishing datasets and find: (1) up to 82% of adversarial examples produced by state-of-the-art crafting algorithms violate domain constraints, (2) domain constraints are robust to adversarial examples; enforcing constraints yields an increase in model accuracy by up to 34%. We observe not only that adversaries must alter inputs to satisfy domain constraints, but that these constraints make the generation of valid adversarial examples far more challenging.