A Method to Facilitate Membership Inference Attacks in Deep Learning Models (2407.01919v1)
Abstract: Modern ML ecosystems offer a surging number of ML frameworks and code repositories that can greatly facilitate the development of ML models. Today, even ordinary data holders who are not ML experts can apply off-the-shelf codebase to build high-performance ML models on their data, many of which are sensitive in nature (e.g., clinical records). In this work, we consider a malicious ML provider who supplies model-training code to the data holders, does not have access to the training process, and has only black-box query access to the resulting model. In this setting, we demonstrate a new form of membership inference attack that is strictly more powerful than prior art. Our attack empowers the adversary to reliably de-identify all the training samples (average >99% attack [email protected]% FPR), and the compromised models still maintain competitive performance as their uncorrupted counterparts (average <1% accuracy drop). Moreover, we show that the poisoned models can effectively disguise the amplified membership leakage under common membership privacy auditing, which can only be revealed by a set of secret samples known by the adversary. Overall, our study not only points to the worst-case membership privacy leakage, but also unveils a common pitfall underlying existing privacy auditing methods, which calls for future efforts to rethink the current practice of auditing membership privacy in machine learning models.
- https://github.com.
- https://about.gitlab.com.
- https://huggingface.co.
- “Adversarial threat landscape for artificial-intelligence systems.” https://atlas.mitre.org.
- “Cis software supply chain security guide.” Center for Internet Security, https://www.cisecurity.org/insights/white-papers/cis-software-supply-chain-security-guide.
- “Ml privacy meter,” https://github.com/privacytrustlab/ml_privacy_meter.
- “Nist ai risk management framework.” https://airc.nist.gov/AI_RMF_Knowledge_Base/AI_RMF.
- “Open source software (oss) secure supply chain (ssc) framework simplified requirements.” Microsoft, https://github.com/microsoft/oss-ssc-framework/blob/main/specification/framework.md.
- “Pytorch dependency poisoned with malicious code,” https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/04/pypi_pytorch_dependency_attack/.
- “Pytorch implementation of wideresnet architecture,” https://github.com/meliketoy/wide-resnet.pytorch.
- “Tensorflow ci/cd flaw exposed supply chain to poisoning attacks,” https://thehackernews.com/2024/01/tensorflow-cicd-flaw-exposed-supply.html.
- “Tensorflow privacy | responsible ai toolkit,” https://www.tensorflow.org/responsible_ai/privacy/guide.
- M. Abadi, A. Chu, I. Goodfellow, H. B. McMahan, I. Mironov, K. Talwar, and L. Zhang, “Deep learning with differential privacy,” in Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, 2016, pp. 308–318.
- J. L. Ba, J. R. Kiros, and G. E. Hinton, “Layer normalization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.06450, 2016.
- E. Bagdasaryan and V. Shmatikov, “Blind backdoors in deep learning models,” in 30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21), 2021, pp. 1505–1521.
- M. Bertran, S. Tang, A. Roth, M. Kearns, J. H. Morgenstern, and S. Z. Wu, “Scalable membership inference attacks via quantile regression,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 36, 2024.
- F. Boenisch, V. Battis, N. Buchmann, and M. Poikela, ““i never thought about securing my machine learning systems”: A study of security and privacy awareness of machine learning practitioners,” in Proceedings of Mensch und Computer 2021, 2021, pp. 520–546.
- A. Brock, S. De, and S. L. Smith, “Characterizing signal propagation to close the performance gap in unnormalized resnets,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.08692, 2021.
- A. Brock, S. De, S. L. Smith, and K. Simonyan, “High-performance large-scale image recognition without normalization,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2021, pp. 1059–1071.
- N. Burow, S. A. Carr, J. Nash, P. Larsen, M. Franz, S. Brunthaler, and M. Payer, “Control-flow integrity: Precision, security, and performance,” ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 1–33, 2017.
- N. Carlini, S. Chien, M. Nasr, S. Song, A. Terzis, and F. Tramer, “Membership inference attacks from first principles,” in 2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 1897–1914.
- M. Castro, M. Costa, and T. Harris, “Securing software by enforcing data-flow integrity,” in Proceedings of the 7th symposium on Operating systems design and implementation, 2006, pp. 147–160.
- H. Chaudhari, J. Abascal, A. Oprea, M. Jagielski, F. Tramèr, and J. Ullman, “Snap: Efficient extraction of private properties with poisoning,” in 2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE Computer Society, 2022, pp. 1935–1952.
- D. Chen, N. Yu, Y. Zhang, and M. Fritz, “Gan-leaks: A taxonomy of membership inference attacks against generative models,” in Proceedings of the 2020 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, 2020, pp. 343–362.
- Y. Chen, C. Shen, Y. Shen, C. Wang, and Y. Zhang, “Amplifying membership exposure via data poisoning,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 35, pp. 29 830–29 844, 2022.
- Z. Chen and K. Pattabiraman, “Overconfidence is a dangerous thing: Mitigating membership inference attacks by enforcing less confident prediction,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01610, 2023.
- C. A. Choquette-Choo, F. Tramer, N. Carlini, and N. Papernot, “Label-only membership inference attacks,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2021, pp. 1964–1974.
- J.-A. Désidéri, “Multiple-gradient descent algorithm (mgda) for multiobjective optimization,” Comptes Rendus Mathematique, vol. 350, no. 5-6, pp. 313–318, 2012.
- J. Dressel and H. Farid, “The accuracy, fairness, and limits of predicting recidivism,” Science advances, vol. 4, no. 1, p. eaao5580, 2018.
- C. Dwork, F. McSherry, K. Nissim, and A. Smith, “Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis,” in Theory of Cryptography: Third Theory of Cryptography Conference, TCC 2006, New York, NY, USA, March 4-7, 2006. Proceedings 3. Springer, 2006, pp. 265–284.
- V. Feldman, “Does learning require memorization? a short tale about a long tail,” in Proceedings of the 52nd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2020, pp. 954–959.
- V. Feldman and C. Zhang, “What neural networks memorize and why: Discovering the long tail via influence estimation,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 33, pp. 2881–2891, 2020.
- L. Fowl, J. Geiping, S. Reich, Y. Wen, W. Czaja, M. Goldblum, and T. Goldstein, “Decepticons: Corrupted transformers breach privacy in federated learning for language models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.12675, 2022.
- T. Gu, B. Dolan-Gavitt, and S. Garg, “Badnets: Identifying vulnerabilities in the machine learning model supply chain,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.06733, 2017.
- J. J. Hathaliya and S. Tanwar, “An exhaustive survey on security and privacy issues in healthcare 4.0,” Computer Communications, vol. 153, pp. 311–335, 2020.
- J. Hayes, L. Melis, G. Danezis, and E. De Cristofaro, “Logan: Membership inference attacks against generative models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.07663, 2017.
- K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 770–778.
- S. Houben, J. Stallkamp, J. Salmen, M. Schlipsing, and C. Igel, “Detection of traffic signs in real-world images: The German Traffic Sign Detection Benchmark,” in International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, no. 1288, 2013.
- H. Hu, Z. Salcic, L. Sun, G. Dobbie, P. S. Yu, and X. Zhang, “Membership inference attacks on machine learning: A survey,” ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 54, no. 11s, pp. 1–37, 2022.
- J. Hu, L. Shen, and G. Sun, “Squeeze-and-excitation networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 7132–7141.
- G. Huang, Z. Liu, L. Van Der Maaten, and K. Q. Weinberger, “Densely connected convolutional networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 4700–4708.
- B. Hui, Y. Yang, H. Yuan, P. Burlina, N. Z. Gong, and Y. Cao, “Practical blind membership inference attack via differential comparisons,” in ISOC Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS), 2021.
- S. Ioffe and C. Szegedy, “Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift,” in International conference on machine learning. pmlr, 2015, pp. 448–456.
- B. Jayaraman and D. Evans, “Evaluating differentially private machine learning in practice,” in USENIX Security Symposium, 2019.
- B. Jayaraman, L. Wang, K. Knipmeyer, Q. Gu, and D. Evans, “Revisiting membership inference under realistic assumptions,” Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, vol. 2021, no. 2, 2021.
- J. Jia, A. Salem, M. Backes, Y. Zhang, and N. Z. Gong, “Memguard: Defending against black-box membership inference attacks via adversarial examples,” in Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, 2019, pp. 259–274.
- A. Krizhevsky et al., “Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images,” 2009.
- A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, “Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 25, 2012.
- R. S. S. Kumar, M. Nyström, J. Lambert, A. Marshall, M. Goertzel, A. Comissoneru, M. Swann, and S. Xia, “Adversarial machine learning-industry perspectives,” in 2020 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops (SPW). IEEE, 2020, pp. 69–75.
- K. Leino and M. Fredrikson, “Stolen memories: Leveraging model memorization for calibrated white-box membership inference,” in 29th {{\{{USENIX}}\}} Security Symposium ({{\{{USENIX}}\}} Security 20), 2020, pp. 1605–1622.
- J. Li, N. Li, and B. Ribeiro, “Membership inference attacks and defenses in classification models,” in Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM Conference on Data and Application Security and Privacy, 2021, pp. 5–16.
- Z. Li and Y. Zhang, “Membership leakage in label-only exposures,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2021, pp. 880–895.
- Y. Liu, Z. Zhao, M. Backes, and Y. Zhang, “Membership inference attacks by exploiting loss trajectory,” in Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2022, pp. 2085–2098.
- Z. Liu, F. Li, Z. Li, and B. Luo, “Loneneuron: a highly-effective feature-domain neural trojan using invisible and polymorphic watermarks,” in Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2022, pp. 2129–2143.
- S. Mahloujifar, E. Ghosh, and M. Chase, “Property inference from poisoning,” in 2022 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 1120–1137.
- M. Malekzadeh, A. Borovykh, and D. Gündüz, “Honest-but-curious nets: Sensitive attributes of private inputs can be secretly coded into the classifiers’ outputs,” in Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2021, pp. 825–844.
- J. Mink, H. Kaur, J. Schmüser, S. Fahl, and Y. Acar, “" security is not my field, i’m a stats guy": A qualitative root cause analysis of barriers to adversarial machine learning defenses in industry,” in In 32nd USENIX Security Symposium, 2023.
- F. Mireshghallah, K. Goyal, A. Uniyal, T. Berg-Kirkpatrick, and R. Shokri, “Quantifying privacy risks of masked language models using membership inference attacks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.03929, 2022.
- M. Nasr, R. Shokri, and A. Houmansadr, “Machine learning with membership privacy using adversarial regularization,” in Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2018, pp. 634–646.
- ——, “Comprehensive privacy analysis of deep learning: Passive and active white-box inference attacks against centralized and federated learning,” in 2019 IEEE symposium on security and privacy (SP). IEEE, 2019, pp. 739–753.
- Y. Netzer, T. Wang, A. Coates, A. Bissacco, B. Wu, and A. Y. Ng, “Reading digits in natural images with unsupervised feature learning,” 2011.
- Z. Newman, J. S. Meyers, and S. Torres-Arias, “Sigstore: Software signing for everybody,” in Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2022, pp. 2353–2367.
- D. Nguyen, S. Gupta, T. Nguyen, S. Rana, P. Nguyen, T. Tran, K. Le, S. Ryan, and S. Venkatesh, “Knowledge distillation with distribution mismatch,” in Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Research Track: European Conference, ECML PKDD 2021, Bilbao, Spain, September 13–17, 2021, Proceedings, Part II 21. Springer, 2021, pp. 250–265.
- M. Ott, S. Edunov, A. Baevski, A. Fan, S. Gross, N. Ng, D. Grangier, and M. Auli, “fairseq: A fast, extensible toolkit for sequence modeling,” in Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019.
- N. Papernot, M. Abadi, U. Erlingsson, I. Goodfellow, and K. Talwar, “Semi-supervised knowledge transfer for deep learning from private training data,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.05755, 2016.
- N. Ponomareva, H. Hazimeh, A. Kurakin, Z. Xu, C. Denison, H. B. McMahan, S. Vassilvitskii, S. Chien, and A. Thakurta, “How to dp-fy ml: A practical guide to machine learning with differential privacy,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.00654, 2023.
- A. Salem, Y. Zhang, M. Humbert, P. Berrang, M. Fritz, and M. Backes, “Ml-leaks: Model and data independent membership inference attacks and defenses on machine learning models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1806.01246, 2018.
- T. R. Schorlemmer, K. G. Kalu, L. Chigges, K. M. Ko, E. A.-M. A. Isghair, S. Baghi, S. Torres-Arias, and J. C. Davis, “Signing in four public software package registries: Quantity, quality, and influencing factors,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.14635, 2024.
- V. Shejwalkar and A. Houmansadr, “Membership privacy for machine learning models through knowledge transfer,” Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 9549–9557, May 2021.
- V. Shejwalkar, H. A. Inan, A. Houmansadr, and R. Sim, “Membership inference attacks against nlp classification models,” in NeurIPS 2021 Workshop Privacy in Machine Learning, 2021.
- B. Shickel, P. J. Tighe, A. Bihorac, and P. Rashidi, “Deep ehr: a survey of recent advances in deep learning techniques for electronic health record (ehr) analysis,” IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1589–1604, 2017.
- R. Shokri, M. Stronati, C. Song, and V. Shmatikov, “Membership inference attacks against machine learning models,” in 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 2017, pp. 3–18.
- C. Song, T. Ristenpart, and V. Shmatikov, “Machine learning models that remember too much,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on computer and communications security, 2017, pp. 587–601.
- C. Song and V. Shmatikov, “Overlearning reveals sensitive attributes,” in 8th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2020, 2020.
- C. Song and R. Shokri, “Robust membership encoding: Inference attacks and copyright protection for deep learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.12982, 2019.
- L. Song and P. Mittal, “Systematic evaluation of privacy risks of machine learning models,” in 30th {{\{{USENIX}}\}} Security Symposium ({{\{{USENIX}}\}} Security 21), 2021.
- N. Srivastava, G. Hinton, A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and R. Salakhutdinov, “Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting,” The journal of machine learning research, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1929–1958, 2014.
- J. Stawinski, “Playing with fire - how we executed a critical supply chain attack on pytorch,” https://johnstawinski.com/2024/01/11/playing-with-fire-how-we-executed-a-critical-supply-chain-attack-on-pytorch/comment-page-1/.
- C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, V. Vanhoucke, and A. Rabinovich, “Going deeper with convolutions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2015, pp. 1–9.
- C. Szegedy, V. Vanhoucke, S. Ioffe, J. Shlens, and Z. Wojna, “Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 2818–2826.
- X. Tang, S. Mahloujifar, L. Song, V. Shejwalkar, M. Nasr, A. Houmansadr, and P. Mittal, “Mitigating membership inference attacks by {{\{{Self-Distillation}}\}} through a novel ensemble architecture,” in 31st USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 22), 2022, pp. 1433–1450.
- F. Tramèr, R. Shokri, A. San Joaquin, H. Le, M. Jagielski, S. Hong, and N. Carlini, “Truth serum: Poisoning machine learning models to reveal their secrets,” in Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2022, p. 2779–2792.
- D. Ulyanov, A. Vedaldi, and V. Lempitsky, “Instance normalization: The missing ingredient for fast stylization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.08022, 2016.
- Y.-X. Wang, B. Balle, and S. P. Kasiviswanathan, “Subsampled rényi differential privacy and analytical moments accountant,” in The 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. PMLR, 2019, pp. 1226–1235.
- Y. Wen, A. Bansal, H. Kazemi, E. Borgnia, M. Goldblum, J. Geiping, and T. Goldstein, “Canary in a coalmine: Better membership inference with ensembled adversarial queries,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.10750, 2022.
- T. Wolf, L. Debut, V. Sanh, J. Chaumond, C. Delangue, A. Moi, P. Cistac, T. Rault, R. Louf, M. Funtowicz et al., “Huggingface’s transformers: State-of-the-art natural language processing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.03771, 2019.
- Y. Wu and K. He, “Group normalization,” in Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV), 2018, pp. 3–19.
- C. Xie, M. Tan, B. Gong, J. Wang, A. L. Yuille, and Q. V. Le, “Adversarial examples improve image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 819–828.
- C. Xie and A. Yuille, “Intriguing properties of adversarial training at scale,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019.
- S. Xie, R. Girshick, P. Dollár, Z. Tu, and K. He, “Aggregated residual transformations for deep neural networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 1492–1500.
- J. Yang, R. Shi, D. Wei, Z. Liu, L. Zhao, B. Ke, H. Pfister, and B. Ni, “Medmnist v2-a large-scale lightweight benchmark for 2d and 3d biomedical image classification,” Scientific Data, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 41, 2023.
- Y. Yao, L. Rosasco, and A. Caponnetto, “On early stopping in gradient descent learning,” Constructive Approximation, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 289–315, 2007.
- J. Ye, A. Maddi, S. K. Murakonda, V. Bindschaedler, and R. Shokri, “Enhanced membership inference attacks against machine learning models,” in Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 2022, pp. 3093–3106.
- S. Yeom, I. Giacomelli, M. Fredrikson, and S. Jha, “Privacy risk in machine learning: Analyzing the connection to overfitting,” in 2018 IEEE 31st Computer Security Foundations Symposium (CSF). IEEE, 2018, pp. 268–282.
- S. Zada, I. Benou, and M. Irani, “Pure noise to the rescue of insufficient data: Improving imbalanced classification by training on random noise images,” in International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 25 817–25 833.
- S. Zagoruyko and N. Komodakis, “Wide residual networks,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.07146, 2016.
- C. Zhang, S. Bengio, M. Hardt, B. Recht, and O. Vinyals, “Understanding deep learning requires rethinking generalization,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2017.
- ——, “Understanding deep learning (still) requires rethinking generalization,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 107–115, 2021.
- Y. Zhang, G. Bai, M. A. P. Chamikara, M. Ma, L. Shen, J. Wang, S. Nepal, M. Xue, L. Wang, and J. Liu, “Agrevader: Poisoning membership inference against byzantine-robust federated learning,” in Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023, 2023, pp. 2371–2382.
- Zitao Chen (9 papers)
- Karthik Pattabiraman (21 papers)