Collaborative Machine Learning (CML) allows participants to jointly train a machine learning model while keeping their training data private. In scenarios where privacy is a strong requirement, such as health-related applications, safety is also a primary concern. This means that privacy-preserving CML processes must produce models that output correct and reliable decisions \emph{even in the presence of potentially untrusted participants}. In response to this issue, researchers propose to use \textit{robust aggregators} that rely on metrics which help filter out malicious contributions that could compromise the training process. In this work, we formalize the landscape of robust aggregators in the literature. Our formalization allows us to show that existing robust aggregators cannot fulfill their goal: either they use distance-based metrics that cannot accurately identify targeted malicious updates; or propose methods whose success is in direct conflict with the ability of CML participants to learn from others and therefore cannot eliminate the risk of manipulation without preventing learning.