PreprintCited by 10Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningPrivacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdvanced Neural Network Applications

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Segmentations-Leak: Membership Inference Attacks and Defenses in Semantic Image Segmentation

Open access

Abstract

Today's success of state of the art methods for semantic segmentation is driven by large datasets. Data is considered an important asset that needs to be protected, as the collection and annotation of such datasets comes at significant efforts and associated costs. In addition, visual data might contain private or sensitive information, that makes it equally unsuited for public release. Unfortunately, recent work on membership inference in the broader area of adversarial machine learning and inference attacks on machine learning models has shown that even black box classifiers leak information on the dataset that they were trained on. We show that such membership inference attacks can be successfully carried out on complex, state of the art models for semantic segmentation. In order to mitigate the associated risks, we also study a series of defenses against such membership inference attacks and find effective counter measures against the existing risks with little effect on the utility of the segmentation method. Finally, we extensively evaluate our attacks and defenses on a range of relevant real-world datasets: Cityscapes, BDD100K, and Mapillary Vistas.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1912.09685

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Membership inference is the most well-established privacy attack and arguably constitutes a bigger privacy threat than class-level attacks, such as the attacks in [7, 59] and model inversion [18, 19].

    “We emphasize that membership inference is the most wellestablished privacy attack and arguably constitutes a bigger privacy threat [13,28,30,37,46,48,60,66,67,75] than classlevel attacks, such as the attacks in [7, 59] and model inversion [18, 19].”

    From When Machine Unlearning Jeopardizes Privacy (2021) · cites this paper as [30]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
He, Y., Rahimian, S., Schiele, B., & Fritz, M.
Affiliations
  • Helmholtz Center for Information Security (DE)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2995395373
Cited by
10
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
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 › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
membership inference attacks, semantic segmentation, privacy leakage, adversarial learning, black-box attacks, sensitive data protection, 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