Closed-Form Bounds for DP-SGD against Record-level Inference

Machine learning models trained with differentially-private (DP) algorithms such as DP-SGD enjoy resilience against a wide range of privacy attacks. Although it is possible to derive bounds for some attacks based solely on an $(\varepsilon,\delta)$-DP guarantee, meaningful bounds require a small enough privacy budget (i.e., injecting a large amount of noise), which results in a large loss in utility. This paper presents a new approach to evaluate the privacy of machine learning models against specific record-level threats, such as membership and attribute inference, without the indirection through DP. We focus on the popular DP-SGD algorithm, and derive simple closed-form bounds. Our proofs model DP-SGD as an information theoretic channel whose inputs are the secrets that an attacker wants to infer (e.g., membership of a data record) and whose outputs are the intermediate model parameters produced by iterative optimization. We obtain bounds for membership inference that match state-of-the-art techniques, whilst being orders of magnitude faster to compute. Additionally, we present a novel data-dependent bound against attribute inference. Our results provide a direct, interpretable, and practical way to evaluate the privacy of trained models against specific inference threats without sacrificing utility.

Rethinking Privacy in Machine Learning Pipelines from an Information Flow Control Perspective

Modern machine learning systems use models trained on ever-growing corpora. Typically, metadata such as ownership, access control, or licensing information is ignored during training. Instead, to mitigate privacy risks, we rely on generic techniques such as dataset sanitization and differentially private model training, with inherent privacy/utility trade-offs that hurt model performance. Moreover, these techniques have limitations in scenarios where sensitive information is shared across multiple participants and fine-grained access control is required. By ignoring metadata, we therefore miss an opportunity to better address security, privacy, and confidentiality challenges. In this paper, we take an information flow control perspective to describe machine learning systems, which allows us to leverage metadata such as access control policies and define clear-cut privacy and confidentiality guarantees with interpretable information flows. Under this perspective, we contrast two different approaches to achieve user-level non-interference: 1) fine-tuning per-user models, and 2) retrieval augmented models that access user-specific datasets at inference time. We compare these two approaches to a trivially non-interfering zero-shot baseline using a public model and to a baseline that fine-tunes this model on the whole corpus. We evaluate trained models on two datasets of scientific articles and demonstrate that retrieval augmented architectures deliver the best utility, scalability, and flexibility while satisfying strict non-interference guarantees.

SoK: Memorization in General-Purpose Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are advancing at a remarkable pace, with myriad applications under development. Unlike most earlier machine learning models, they are no longer built for one specific application but are designed to excel in a wide range of tasks. A major part of this success is due to their huge training datasets and the unprecedented number of model parameters, which allow them to memorize large amounts of information contained in the training data. This memorization goes beyond mere language, and encompasses information only present in a few documents. This is often desirable since it is necessary for performing tasks such as question answering, and therefore an important part of learning, but also brings a whole array of issues, from privacy and security to copyright and beyond. LLMs can memorize short secrets in the training data, but can also memorize concepts like facts or writing styles that can be expressed in text in many different ways. We propose a taxonomy for memorization in LLMs that covers verbatim text, facts, ideas and algorithms, writing styles, distributional properties, and alignment goals. We describe the implications of each type of memorization - both positive and negative - for model performance, privacy, security and confidentiality, copyright, and auditing, and ways to detect and prevent memorization. We further highlight the challenges that arise from the predominant way of defining memorization with respect to model behavior instead of model weights, due to LLM-specific phenomena such as reasoning capabilities or differences between decoding algorithms. Throughout the paper, we describe potential risks and opportunities arising from memorization in LLMs that we hope will motivate new research directions.

Why Train More? Effective and Efficient Membership Inference via Memorization

Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) aim to identify specific data samples within the private training dataset of machine learning models, leading to serious privacy violations and other sophisticated threats. Many practical black-box MIAs require query access to the data distribution (the same distribution where the private data is drawn) to train shadow models. By doing so, the adversary obtains models trained "with" or "without" samples drawn from the distribution, and analyzes the characteristics of the samples under consideration. The adversary is often required to train more than hundreds of shadow models to extract the signals needed for MIAs; this becomes the computational overhead of MIAs. In this paper, we propose that by strategically choosing the samples, MI adversaries can maximize their attack success while minimizing the number of shadow models. First, our motivational experiments suggest memorization as the key property explaining disparate sample vulnerability to MIAs. We formalize this through a theoretical bound that connects MI advantage with memorization. Second, we show sample complexity bounds that connect the number of shadow models needed for MIAs with memorization. Lastly, we confirm our theoretical arguments with comprehensive experiments; by utilizing samples with high memorization scores, the adversary can (a) significantly improve its efficacy regardless of the MIA used, and (b) reduce the number of shadow models by nearly two orders of magnitude compared to state-of-the-art approaches.

Re-aligning Shadow Models can Improve White-box Membership Inference Attacks

Machine learning models have been shown to leak sensitive information about their training datasets. As models are being increasingly used, on devices, to automate tasks and power new applications, there have been concerns that such white-box access to its parameters, as opposed to the black-box setting which only provides query access to the model, increases the attack surface. Directly extending the shadow modelling technique from the black-box to the white-box setting has been shown, in general, not to perform better than black-box only attacks. A key reason is misalignment, a known characteristic of deep neural networks. We here present the first systematic analysis of the causes of misalignment in shadow models and show the use of a different weight initialisation to be the main cause of shadow model misalignment. Second, we extend several re-alignment techniques, previously developed in the model fusion literature, to the shadow modelling context, where the goal is to re-align the layers of a shadow model to those of the target model.We show re-alignment techniques to significantly reduce the measured misalignment between the target and shadow models. Finally, we perform a comprehensive evaluation of white-box membership inference attacks (MIA). Our analysis reveals that (1) MIAs suffer from misalignment between shadow models, but that (2) re-aligning the shadow models improves, sometimes significantly, MIA performance. On the CIFAR10 dataset with a false positive rate of 1\%, white-box MIA using re-aligned shadow models improves the true positive rate by 4.5\%.Taken together, our results highlight that on-device deployment increase the attack surface and that the newly available information can be used by an attacker.

On the Efficacy of Differentially Private Few-shot Image Classification

There has been significant recent progress in training differentially private (DP) models which achieve accuracy that approaches the best non-private models. These DP models are typically pretrained on large public datasets and then fine-tuned on downstream datasets that are (i) relatively large, and (ii) similar in distribution to the pretraining data. However, in many applications including personalization, it is crucial to perform well in the few-shot setting, as obtaining large amounts of labeled data may be problematic; and on images from a wide variety of domains for use in various specialist settings. To understand under which conditions few-shot DP can be effective, we perform an exhaustive set of experiments that reveals how the accuracy and vulnerability to attack of few-shot DP image classification models are affected as the number of shots per class, privacy level, model architecture, dataset, and subset of learnable parameters in the model vary. We show that to achieve DP accuracy on par with non-private models, the shots per class must be increased as the privacy level increases by as much as 32$\times$ for CIFAR-100 at $\epsilon=1$. We also find that few-shot non-private models are highly susceptible to membership inference attacks. DP provides clear mitigation against the attacks, but a small $\epsilon$ is required to effectively prevent them. Finally, we evaluate DP federated learning systems and establish state-of-the-art performance on the challenging FLAIR federated learning benchmark.

Analyzing Leakage of Personally Identifiable Information in Language Models

Language Models (LMs) have been shown to leak information about training data through sentence-level membership inference and reconstruction attacks. Understanding the risk of LMs leaking Personally Identifiable Information (PII) has received less attention, which can be attributed to the false assumption that dataset curation techniques such as scrubbing are sufficient to prevent PII leakage. Scrubbing techniques reduce but do not prevent the risk of PII leakage: in practice scrubbing is imperfect and must balance the trade-off between minimizing disclosure and preserving the utility of the dataset. On the other hand, it is unclear to which extent algorithmic defenses such as differential privacy, designed to guarantee sentence- or user-level privacy, prevent PII disclosure. In this work, we propose (i) a taxonomy of PII leakage in LMs, (ii) metrics to quantify PII leakage, and (iii) attacks showing that PII leakage is a threat in practice. Our taxonomy provides rigorous game-based definitions for PII leakage via black-box extraction, inference, and reconstruction attacks with only API access to an LM. We empirically evaluate attacks against GPT-2 models fine-tuned on three domains: case law, health care, and e-mails. Our main contributions are (i) novel attacks that can extract up to 10 times more PII sequences as existing attacks, (ii) showing that sentence-level differential privacy reduces the risk of PII disclosure but still leaks about 3% of PII sequences, and (iii) a subtle connection between record-level membership inference and PII reconstruction.

SoK: Let The Privacy Games Begin! A Unified Treatment of Data Inference Privacy in Machine Learning

Deploying machine learning models in production may allow adversaries to infer sensitive information about training data. There is a vast literature analyzing different types of inference risks, ranging from membership inference to reconstruction attacks. Inspired by the success of games (i.e., probabilistic experiments) to study security properties in cryptography, some authors describe privacy inference risks in machine learning using a similar game-based style. However, adversary capabilities and goals are often stated in subtly different ways from one presentation to the other, which makes it hard to relate and compose results. In this paper, we present a game-based framework to systematize the body of knowledge on privacy inference risks in machine learning.

Invariant Aggregator for Defending Federated Backdoor Attacks

Federated learning is gaining popularity as it enables training of high-utility models across several clients without directly sharing their private data. As a downside, the federated setting makes the model vulnerable to various adversarial attacks in the presence of malicious clients. Specifically, an adversary can perform backdoor attacks to control model predictions via poisoning the training dataset with a trigger. In this work, we propose a mitigation for backdoor attacks in a federated learning setup. Our solution forces the model optimization trajectory to focus on the invariant directions that are generally useful for utility and avoid selecting directions that favor few and possibly malicious clients. Concretely, we consider the sign consistency of the pseudo-gradient (the client update) as an estimation of the invariance. Following this, our approach performs dimension-wise filtering to remove pseudo-gradient elements with low sign consistency. Then, a robust mean estimator eliminates outliers among the remaining dimensions. Our theoretical analysis further shows the necessity of the defense combination and illustrates how our proposed solution defends the federated learning model. Empirical results on three datasets with different modalities and varying number of clients show that our approach mitigates backdoor attacks with a negligible cost on the model utility.

Membership Inference Attacks and Generalization: A Causal Perspective

Membership inference (MI) attacks highlight a privacy weakness in present stochastic training methods for neural networks. It is not well understood, however, why they arise. Are they a natural consequence of imperfect generalization only? Which underlying causes should we address during training to mitigate these attacks? Towards answering such questions, we propose the first approach to explain MI attacks and their connection to generalization based on principled causal reasoning. We offer causal graphs that quantitatively explain the observed MI attack performance achieved for $6$ attack variants. We refute several prior non-quantitative hypotheses that over-simplify or over-estimate the influence of underlying causes, thereby failing to capture the complex interplay between several factors. Our causal models also show a new connection between generalization and MI attacks via their shared causal factors. Our causal models have high predictive power ($0.90$), i.e., their analytical predictions match with observations in unseen experiments often, which makes analysis via them a pragmatic alternative.