Cited by 11Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningSecurity and Verification in Computing

A federated learning attack method based on edge collaboration via cloud

Yang, Jie, Baker, Thar, Gill, Sukhpal Singh, Yang, Xiaochuan, Han, Weifeng, Li, Yuanzhang·2024·Software: Practice and Experience

Abstract

Federated learning (FL) is widely used in edge‐cloud collaborative training due to its distributed architecture and privacy‐preserving properties without sharing local data. FLTrust, the most state‐of‐the‐art FL defense method, is a federated learning defense system with trust guidance. However, we found that FLTrust is not very robust. Therefore, in the edge collaboration scenario, we mainly study the poisoning attack on the FLTrust defense system. Due to the aggregation rule, FLTrust, with trust guidance, the model updates of participants with a significant deviation from the root gradient direction will be eliminated, which makes the poisoning effect on the global model not obvious. To solve this problem, under the premise of not being deleted by the FLTrust aggregation rules, we construct malicious model updates that deviate from the trust gradient to the greatest extent to achieve model poisoning attacks. First, we utilize the rotation of high‐dimensional vectors around axes to construct malicious vectors with fixed orientations. Second, the malicious vector is constructed by the gradient inversion method to achieve an efficient and fast attack. Finally, a method of optimizing random noise is used to construct a malicious vector with a fixed direction. Experimental results show that our attack method reduces the model accuracy by 20%, severely undermining the usability of the model. Attacks are also successful hundreds of times faster than the FLTrust adaptive attack met…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/spe.3180

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Generic processing functionalities would aid developers to mix and match when devising edge solutions.

    “Similarly, generic processing functionalities would aid developers to mix and match when devising edge solutions [24].”

    From Edge AI: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [24]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yang, J., Baker, T., Gill, S. S., Yang, X., Han, W., & Li, Y.
Affiliations
  • Beijing Institute of Technology (CN)
  • University of Sharjah (AE)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
  • School of Mechanical Manufacturing and Automation Engineer of China Railway Tunnel Bureau Group Co., Ltd Zhengzhou Henan China
Corresponding author
  • Baker, Thar
  • Li, Yuanzhang
Venue
Software: Practice and Experience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-12-10
Volume
54
Issue
7
Pages
1257-1274
ISSN
  • 0038-0644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-024X
OpenAlex
W4312067640
Cited by
11
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Software Practice and Experience (publishedVersion)
  • University of Brighton Repository (University of Brighton) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (2020YFB1712101)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1936218, 62072037)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Security and Verification in Computing
Keywords
federated learning, model poisoning, cloud-edge collaboration, gradient inversion, vector rotation, aggregation rules, attack robustness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review