Cited by 433Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataDigital Media Forensic Detection

LOGAN: Membership Inference Attacks Against Generative Models

Open access
Hayes, Jamie, Melis, Luca, Danezis, George, De Cristofaro, Emiliano·2019·Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies

Abstract

Generative models estimate the underlying distribution of a dataset to generate realistic samples according to that distribution. In this paper, we present the first membership inference attacks against generative models: given a data point, the adversary determines whether or not it was used to train the model. Our attacks leverage Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), which combine a discriminative and a generative model, to detect overfitting and recognize inputs that were part of training datasets, using the discriminator’s capacity to learn statistical differences in distributions. We present attacks based on both white-box and black-box access to the target model, against several state-of-the-art generative models, over datasets of complex representations of faces (LFW), objects (CIFAR-10), and medical images (Diabetic Retinopathy). We also discuss the sensitivity of the attacks to different training parameters, and their robustness against mitigation strategies, finding that defenses are either ineffective or lead to significantly worse performances of the generative models in terms of training stability and/or sample quality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2478/popets-2019-0008

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Formal security and secrecy mechanisms such as model encryption can only partially address privacy requirements, as even encrypted models have been found to leak sensitive information.

    “Formal security and secrecy mechanisms such as model encryption can only partially address this requirement, as even encrypted models have been found to leak sensitive information in previous work23,24.”

    From Medical imaging deep learning with differential privacy (2021) · cites this paper as [24]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hayes, J., Melis, L., Danezis, G., & De Cristofaro, E.
Affiliations
  • University College London (GB)
  • University College London
Venue
Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies
Published
2018-12-24
Volume
2019
Issue
1
Pages
133-152
ISSN
2299-0984 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2887995258
Cited by
433
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 46 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 68 · 2020: 54 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 2
FWCI
21.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Data
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Digital Media Forensic Detection
Keywords
membership inference attacks, generative models, generative adversarial networks, privacy attacks, overfitting detection, black-box attacks, white-box attacks, defense robustness, training data privacy, medical image privacy

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