Cited by 50Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataRecommender Systems and TechniquesAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning

Manipulating Federated Recommender Systems: Poisoning with Synthetic Users and Its Countermeasures

Open access
Yuan, Wei, Nguyen, Quoc Viet Hung, He, Tieke, Chen, Liang, Yin, Hongzhi·2023·Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval

Abstract

Federated Recommender Systems (FedRecs) are considered privacy-preserving techniques to collaboratively learn a recommendation model without sharing user data. Since all participants can directly influence the systems by uploading gradients, FedRecs are vulnerable to poisoning attacks of malicious clients. However, most existing poisoning attacks on FedRecs are either based on some prior knowledge or with less effectiveness. To reveal the real vulnerability of FedRecs, in this paper, we present a new poisoning attack method to manipulate target items' ranks and exposure rates effectively in the top-K recommendation without relying on any prior knowledge. Specifically, our attack manipulates target items' exposure rate by a group of synthetic malicious users who upload poisoned gradients considering target items' alternative products. We conduct extensive experiments with two widely used FedRecs (Fed-NCF and Fed-LightGCN) on two real-world recommendation datasets. The experimental results show that our attack can significantly improve the exposure rate of unpopular target items with extremely fewer malicious users and fewer global epochs than state-of-the-art attacks. In addition to disclosing the security hole, we design a novel countermeasure for poisoning attacks on FedRecs. Specifically, we propose a hierarchical gradient clipping with sparsified updating to defend against existing poisoning attacks. The empirical results demonstrate that the proposed defending mechanism improves the robustness of FedRecs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3539618.3591722

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Decentralized recommender systems remain vulnerable to threats such as inference attacks and differential attacks.

    “Although decentralized RS inherently provides a privacy protocol, as users preserve their entire historical data, and even FedRec prioritizes user privacy over DCS, it remains vulnerable to threats such as inference attacks and differential attacks [105, 138-142].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Authors
Yuan, W., Nguyen, Q. V. H., He, T., Chen, L., & Yin, H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Griffith University (AU)
  • Nanjing University (CN)
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
Venue
Proceedings of the 46th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval
Publisher
ACM
Published
2023-07-18
Pages
1690-1699
OpenAlex
W4384655830
Cited by
50
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 3
FWCI
8.86
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Australian Research Council (FT210100624,DP190101985)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Keywords
federated recommender systems, poisoning attacks, top-k recommendation, privacy-preserving recommendation

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