Membership Inference via Backdooring
June 10, 2022 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Hongsheng Hu, Zoran Salcic, Gillian Dobbie, Jinjun Chen, Lichao Sun, Xuyun Zhang
arXiv ID
2206.04823
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Citations
39
Venue
International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Recently issued data privacy regulations like GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) grant individuals the right to be forgotten. In the context of machine learning, this requires a model to forget about a training data sample if requested by the data owner (i.e., machine unlearning). As an essential step prior to machine unlearning, it is still a challenge for a data owner to tell whether or not her data have been used by an unauthorized party to train a machine learning model. Membership inference is a recently emerging technique to identify whether a data sample was used to train a target model, and seems to be a promising solution to this challenge. However, straightforward adoption of existing membership inference approaches fails to address the challenge effectively due to being originally designed for attacking membership privacy and suffering from several severe limitations such as low inference accuracy on well-generalized models. In this paper, we propose a novel membership inference approach inspired by the backdoor technology to address the said challenge. Specifically, our approach of Membership Inference via Backdooring (MIB) leverages the key observation that a backdoored model behaves very differently from a clean model when predicting on deliberately marked samples created by a data owner. Appealingly, MIB requires data owners' marking a small number of samples for membership inference and only black-box access to the target model, with theoretical guarantees for inference results. We perform extensive experiments on various datasets and deep neural network architectures, and the results validate the efficacy of our approach, e.g., marking only 0.1% of the training dataset is practically sufficient for effective membership inference.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted