Cited by 188Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningCryptography and Data Security

Local and Central Differential Privacy for Robustness and Privacy in Federated Learning

Open access
Naseri, Mohammad, Hayes, Jamie, De Cristofaro, Emiliano·2022·Proceedings 2022 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium

Abstract

Federated Learning (FL) allows multiple participants to train machine learning models collaboratively by keeping their datasets local while only exchanging model updates.Alas, this is not necessarily free from privacy and robustness vulnerabilities, e.g., via membership, property, and backdoor attacks.This paper investigates whether and to what extent one can use differential Privacy (DP) to protect both privacy and robustness in FL.To this end, we present a first-of-its-kind evaluation of Local and Central Differential Privacy (LDP/CDP) techniques in FL, assessing their feasibility and effectiveness.Our experiments show that both DP variants do defend against backdoor attacks, albeit with varying levels of protectionutility trade-offs, but anyway more effectively than other robustness defenses.DP also mitigates white-box membership inference attacks in FL, and our work is the first to show it empirically.Neither LDP nor CDP, however, defend against property inference.Overall, our work provides a comprehensive, re-usable measurement methodology to quantify the trade-offs between robustness/privacy and utility in differentially private FL.We run experiments on three datasets for backdoor attacks:

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.14722/ndss.2022.23054

Cites

139 of 139 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Both LDP and CDP are effective against poisoning attacks, and CDP is more effective than LDP against poisoning attacks.

    “The experimental results show that both LDP and CDP are effective against poisoning attacks, and CDP is more effective than LDP against poisoning attacks.”

    From Poisoning attacks in federated learning: A survey (2023) · cites this paper as [66]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. A. Go, R. Bhayani, and L. Huang. Twitter sentiment clas- sification using distant supervision. CS224N project report, Stanford, 1(12):2009, 2009.
  2. M. Jagielski, G. Severi, N. Pousette Harger, and A. Oprea. Sub- population data poisoning attacks. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 3104-3122, 2021.
  3. M. Nasr, R. Shokri, and A. Houmansadr. Comprehensive privacy analysis of deep learning. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2019.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Naseri, M., Hayes, J., & De Cristofaro, E.
Affiliations
The Alan Turing Institute (GB)
Venue
Proceedings 2022 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium
Published
2022
OpenAlex
W3209752568
Cited by
188
References
134
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 3
FWCI
22.79
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
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 › Cryptography and Data Security
Keywords
federated learning, differential privacy, local differential privacy, central differential privacy, backdoor attacks, membership inference attacks, property inference attacks, privacy-preserving machine learning

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