PreprintCited by 2Privacy-Preserving Technologies in DataAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningCryptography and Data Security

Quantifying and Localizing Usable Information Leakage from Neural Network Gradients

Open access
Mo, Fan, Borovykh, Anastasia, Malekzadeh, Mohammad, Demetriou, Soteris, Gündüz, Deniz, Haddadi, Hamed·2021·arXiv

Abstract

In collaborative learning, clients keep their data private and communicate only the computed gradients of the deep neural network being trained on their local data. Several recent attacks show that one can still extract private information from the shared network's gradients compromising clients' privacy. In this paper, to quantify the private information leakage from gradients we adopt usable information theory. We focus on two types of private information: original information in data reconstruction attacks and latent information in attribute inference attacks. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis over the gradients is performed to explore the underlying cause of information leakage and validate the results of the proposed framework. Finally, we conduct numerical evaluations on six benchmark datasets and four well-known deep models. We measure the impact of training hyperparameters, e.g., batches and epochs, as well as potential defense mechanisms, e.g., dropout and differential privacy. Our proposed framework enables clients to localize and quantify the private information leakage in a layer-wise manner, and enables a better understanding of the sources of information leakage in collaborative learning, which can be used by future studies to benchmark new attacks and defense mechanisms.

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.2105.13929

Cites

72 of 72 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?

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: 10

  1. [11][11] M. Nasr, R. Shokri, and A. Houmansadr, 'Passive and active white-box inference attacks against centralized and federated learning,' in 2019 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP) , 2019, pp. 739-753. -
  2. [18][18] Z. Goldfeld, E. Van Den Berg, K. Greenewald, I. Melnyk, N. Nguyen, B. Kingsbury, and Y. Polyanskiy, 'Estimating information flow in deep neural networks,' in ICML , 2019, pp. 2299-2308. -
  3. [32][32] F. Mo, A. S. Shamsabadi, K. Katevas, S. Demetriou, I. Leontiadis, A. Cavallaro, and H. Haddadi, 'DarkneTZ: towards model privacy at the edge using trusted execution environments,' in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services , 2020, pp. 161-174. -
  4. [34][34] F. Mo, H. Hamed, K. Katevas, E. Marin, D. Perino, and N. Kourtellis, 'PPFL: Privacy-preserving federated learning with trusted execution environments,' in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services , 2021. -
  5. [39][39] G. Montavon, K.-R. M¨ uller, and M. Braun, 'Layer-wise analysis of deep networks with Gaussian kernels,' Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 23, pp. 1678-1686, 2010. -
  6. [45][45] C. E. Shannon, 'A mathematical theory of communication,' The Bell system technical journal , vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 379-423, 1948. -
  7. [52][52] T. Zahavy, B. Kang, A. Sivak, J. Feng, H. Xu, and S. Mannor, 'Ensemble robustness and generalization of stochastic deep learning algorithms,' in International Conference on Learning Representations Workshop , 2018. -
  8. [64][64] G. B. Huang, M. Mattar, T. Berg, and E. Learned-Miller, 'Labeled faces in the wild: A database for studying face recognition in unconstrained environments,' in Workshop on faces in'Real-Life'Images: detection, alignment, and recognition , 2008. -
  9. [67][67] A. Maas, R. E. Daly, P. T. Pham, D. Huang, A. Y. Ng, and C. Potts, 'Learning word vectors for sentiment analysis,' in Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: Human language technologies , 2011, pp. 142-150. -
  10. [71][71] B. Jayaraman and D. Evans, 'Evaluating differentially private machine learning in practice,' in 28th { USENIX } Security Symposium , 2019, pp. 1895-1912. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mo, F., Borovykh, A., Malekzadeh, M., Demetriou, S., Gündüz, D., & Haddadi, H.
Affiliations
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • University of Warwick (GB)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4288075818
Cited by
1
References
68
Citations by year
2024: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
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
information leakage, cooperative learning, federated learning privacy, data reconstruction attacks, attribute inference attacks, differential privacy, dropout, privacy attacks

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