CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 184Cryptography and Data SecurityAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningCryptographic Implementations and Security

Learning to Protect Communications with Adversarial Neural Cryptography

Open access
Abadi, Martín, Andersen, David G.·2016·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1610.06918arXiv 1610.06918
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We ask whether neural networks can learn to use secret keys to protect information from other neural networks. Specifically, we focus on ensuring confidentiality properties in a multiagent system, and we specify those properties in terms of an adversary. Thus, a system may consist of neural networks named Alice and Bob, and we aim to limit what a third neural network named Eve learns from eavesdropping on the communication between Alice and Bob. We do not prescribe specific cryptographic algorithms to these neural networks; instead, we train end-to-end, adversarially. We demonstrate that the neural networks can learn how to perform forms of encryption and decryption, and also how to apply these operations selectively in order to meet confidentiality goals.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1610.06918

Cites

18 of 18 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?

  • The original ANC methodology is not good enough to generate a secure cryptosystem even using a simple neural network designed to allow a perfectly secure solution.

    “Using this neural network, we show that the ANC model is not good enough to generate secure cryptosystems even using a simple NN.”

    From Learning Perfectly Secure Cryptography to Protect Communications with Adversarial Neural Cryptography (2018) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says the ANC method provides much weaker security guarantees than classical cryptography. It does not conclude that ANC cannot generate a secure cryptosystem, or test the particular simple neural network described in the citing sentence. That sentence presents the stronger result as the citing authors’ own finding. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The problem with the original ANC approach is that Eve's job is too hard: Eve must decrypt a random message having access only to the ciphertext.

    “As we will see in the experiments of Section 4, the problem with the approach proposed in the original ANC work [14] is that Eve’s job is too hard. It must decrypt a random message having access only to the ciphertext.”

    From Learning Perfectly Secure Cryptography to Protect Communications with Adversarial Neural Cryptography (2018) · cites this paper as [14]

  • Abadi and Andersen did not show any solution learned by their networks.

    “However, in their work, they did not show any solution learned by the networks.”

    From Learning Perfectly Secure Cryptography to Protect Communications with Adversarial Neural Cryptography (2018) · cites this paper as [14]

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

1 of the 19 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Boaz Barak, Oded Goldreich, Russell Impagliazzo, Steven Rudich, Amit Sahai, Salil Vadhan, and Ke Yang. On the (im)possibility of obfuscating programs. J. ACM , 59(2):6:1-6:48, May 2012. ISSN 0004-5411. doi: 10.1145/2160158.2160159. URL http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/ 2160158.2160159 . · DOI
  2. Xi Chen, Yan Duan, Rein Houthooft, John Schulman, Ilya Sutskever, and Pieter Abbeel. InfoGAN: Interpretable representation learning by information maximizing generative adversarial nets. CoRR , abs/1606.03657, 2016. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.03657 . · arXiv
  3. Jakob N. Foerster, Yannis M. Assael, Nando de Freitas, and Shimon Whiteson. Learning to communicate to solve riddles with deep distributed recurrent Q-networks. CoRR , abs/1602.02672, 2016a. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.02672 . · arXiv
  4. Jakob N. Foerster, Yannis M. Assael, Nando de Freitas, and Shimon Whiteson. Learning to communicate with deep multi-agent reinforcement learning. CoRR , abs/1605.06676, 2016b. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.06676 . · arXiv
  5. Yaroslav Ganin, Evgeniya Ustinova, Hana Ajakan, Pascal Germain, Hugo Larochelle, Franc ¸ois Laviolette, Mario Marchand, and Victor S. Lempitsky. Domain-adversarial training of neural networks. CoRR , abs/1505.07818, 2015. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1505.07818 . · arXiv
  6. Shafi Goldwasser and Silvio Micali. Probabilistic encryption. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. , 28(2):270299, 1984. doi: 10.1016/0022-0000(84)90070-9. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 0022-0000(84)90070-9 . · DOI
  7. Ian J. Goodfellow, Jean Pouget-Abadie, Mehdi Mirza, Bing Xu, David Warde-Farley, Sherjil Ozair, Aaron C. Courville, and Yoshua Bengio. Generative adversarial nets. In Zoubin Ghahramani, Max Welling, Corinna Cortes, Neil D. Lawrence, and Kilian Q. Weinberger (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27: Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems 2014, December 8-13 2014, Montreal, Quebec, Canada , pp. 2672-2680, 2014a. URL http://papers.nips.cc/paper/5423-generative-adversarial-nets .
  8. Wolfgang Kinzel and Ido Kanter. Neural cryptography. arXiv preprint cond-mat/0208453 , 2002. · arXiv
  9. Sebastian Nowozin, Botond Cseke, and Ryota Tomioka. f-GAN: Training generative neural samplers using variational divergence minimization. CoRR , abs/1606.00709, 2016. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/1606.00709 . · arXiv
  10. Lillian J Ratliff, Samuel A Burden, and S Shankar Sastry. Characterization and computation of local nash equilibria in continuous games. In Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), 2013 51st Annual Allerton Conference on , pp. 917-924. IEEE, 2013.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Abadi, M., & Andersen, D. G.
Affiliations
  • Google Brain
  • Google (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2016
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1610.06918
arXiv
1610.06918
OpenAlex
W2545316382
Cited by
182
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptographic Implementations and Security
Keywords
neural cryptography, adversarial neural networks, secret key, confidentiality, eavesdropping, multi-agent systems, encryption and decryption, selective encryption, end-to-end learning, information security

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