-
Assessing Differentially Private Variational Autoencoders under Membership Inference
Authors:
Daniel Bernau,
Jonas Robl,
Florian Kerschbaum
Abstract:
We present an approach to quantify and compare the privacy-accuracy trade-off for differentially private Variational Autoencoders. Our work complements previous work in two aspects. First, we evaluate the the strong reconstruction MI attack against Variational Autoencoders under differential privacy. Second, we address the data scientist's challenge of setting privacy parameter epsilon, which stee…
▽ More
We present an approach to quantify and compare the privacy-accuracy trade-off for differentially private Variational Autoencoders. Our work complements previous work in two aspects. First, we evaluate the the strong reconstruction MI attack against Variational Autoencoders under differential privacy. Second, we address the data scientist's challenge of setting privacy parameter epsilon, which steers the differential privacy strength and thus also the privacy-accuracy trade-off. In our experimental study we consider image and time series data, and three local and central differential privacy mechanisms. We find that the privacy-accuracy trade-offs strongly depend on the dataset and model architecture. We do rarely observe favorable privacy-accuracy trade-off for Variational Autoencoders, and identify a case where LDP outperforms CDP.
△ Less
Submitted 16 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Quantifying identifiability to choose and audit $ε$ in differentially private deep learning
Authors:
Daniel Bernau,
Günther Eibl,
Philip W. Grassal,
Hannah Keller,
Florian Kerschbaum
Abstract:
Differential privacy allows bounding the influence that training data records have on a machine learning model. To use differential privacy in machine learning, data scientists must choose privacy parameters $(ε,δ)$. Choosing meaningful privacy parameters is key, since models trained with weak privacy parameters might result in excessive privacy leakage, while strong privacy parameters might overl…
▽ More
Differential privacy allows bounding the influence that training data records have on a machine learning model. To use differential privacy in machine learning, data scientists must choose privacy parameters $(ε,δ)$. Choosing meaningful privacy parameters is key, since models trained with weak privacy parameters might result in excessive privacy leakage, while strong privacy parameters might overly degrade model utility. However, privacy parameter values are difficult to choose for two main reasons. First, the theoretical upper bound on privacy loss $(ε,δ)$ might be loose, depending on the chosen sensitivity and data distribution of practical datasets. Second, legal requirements and societal norms for anonymization often refer to individual identifiability, to which $(ε,δ)$ are only indirectly related.
We transform $(ε,δ)$ to a bound on the Bayesian posterior belief of the adversary assumed by differential privacy concerning the presence of any record in the training dataset. The bound holds for multidimensional queries under composition, and we show that it can be tight in practice. Furthermore, we derive an identifiability bound, which relates the adversary assumed in differential privacy to previous work on membership inference adversaries. We formulate an implementation of this differential privacy adversary that allows data scientists to audit model training and compute empirical identifiability scores and empirical $(ε,δ)$.
△ Less
Submitted 20 July, 2021; v1 submitted 4 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
-
On the privacy-utility trade-off in differentially private hierarchical text classification
Authors:
Dominik Wunderlich,
Daniel Bernau,
Francesco Aldà,
Javier Parra-Arnau,
Thorsten Strufe
Abstract:
Hierarchical text classification consists in classifying text documents into a hierarchy of classes and sub-classes. Although artificial neural networks have proved useful to perform this task, unfortunately they can leak training data information to adversaries due to training data memorization. Using differential privacy during model training can mitigate leakage attacks against trained models,…
▽ More
Hierarchical text classification consists in classifying text documents into a hierarchy of classes and sub-classes. Although artificial neural networks have proved useful to perform this task, unfortunately they can leak training data information to adversaries due to training data memorization. Using differential privacy during model training can mitigate leakage attacks against trained models, enabling the models to be shared safely at the cost of reduced model accuracy. This work investigates the privacy-utility trade-off in hierarchical text classification with differential privacy guarantees, and identifies neural network architectures that offer superior trade-offs. To this end, we use a white-box membership inference attack to empirically assess the information leakage of three widely used neural network architectures. We show that large differential privacy parameters already suffice to completely mitigate membership inference attacks, thus resulting only in a moderate decrease in model utility. More specifically, for large datasets with long texts we observed Transformer-based models to achieve an overall favorable privacy-utility trade-off, while for smaller datasets with shorter texts convolutional neural networks are preferable.
△ Less
Submitted 9 December, 2021; v1 submitted 4 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
-
Assessing differentially private deep learning with Membership Inference
Authors:
Daniel Bernau,
Philip-William Grassal,
Jonas Robl,
Florian Kerschbaum
Abstract:
Attacks that aim to identify the training data of public neural networks represent a severe threat to the privacy of individuals participating in the training data set. A possible protection is offered by anonymization of the training data or training function with differential privacy. However, data scientists can choose between local and central differential privacy and need to select meaningful…
▽ More
Attacks that aim to identify the training data of public neural networks represent a severe threat to the privacy of individuals participating in the training data set. A possible protection is offered by anonymization of the training data or training function with differential privacy. However, data scientists can choose between local and central differential privacy and need to select meaningful privacy parameters $ε$ which is challenging for non-privacy experts. We empirically compare local and central differential privacy mechanisms under white- and black-box membership inference to evaluate their relative privacy-accuracy trade-offs. We experiment with several datasets and show that this trade-off is similar for both types of mechanisms. This suggests that local differential privacy is a sound alternative to central differential privacy for differentially private deep learning, since small $ε$ in central differential privacy and large $ε$ in local differential privacy result in similar membership inference attack risk.
△ Less
Submitted 26 May, 2020; v1 submitted 24 December, 2019;
originally announced December 2019.
-
Reconstruction and Membership Inference Attacks against Generative Models
Authors:
Benjamin Hilprecht,
Martin Härterich,
Daniel Bernau
Abstract:
We present two information leakage attacks that outperform previous work on membership inference against generative models. The first attack allows membership inference without assumptions on the type of the generative model. Contrary to previous evaluation metrics for generative models, like Kernel Density Estimation, it only considers samples of the model which are close to training data records…
▽ More
We present two information leakage attacks that outperform previous work on membership inference against generative models. The first attack allows membership inference without assumptions on the type of the generative model. Contrary to previous evaluation metrics for generative models, like Kernel Density Estimation, it only considers samples of the model which are close to training data records. The second attack specifically targets Variational Autoencoders, achieving high membership inference accuracy. Furthermore, previous work mostly considers membership inference adversaries who perform single record membership inference. We argue for considering regulatory actors who perform set membership inference to identify the use of specific datasets for training. The attacks are evaluated on two generative model architectures, Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) and Variational Autoencoders (VAEs), trained on standard image datasets. Our results show that the two attacks yield success rates superior to previous work on most data sets while at the same time having only very mild assumptions. We envision the two attacks in combination with the membership inference attack type formalization as especially useful. For example, to enforce data privacy standards and automatically assessing model quality in machine learning as a service setups. In practice, our work motivates the use of GANs since they prove less vulnerable against information leakage attacks while producing detailed samples.
△ Less
Submitted 7 June, 2019;
originally announced June 2019.
-
The Influence of Differential Privacy on Short Term Electric Load Forecasting
Authors:
Günther Eibl,
Kaibin Bao,
Philip-William Grassal,
Daniel Bernau,
Hartmut Schmeck
Abstract:
There has been a large number of contributions on privacy-preserving smart metering with Differential Privacy, addressing questions from actual enforcement at the smart meter to billing at the energy provider. However, exploitation is mostly limited to application of cryptographic security means between smart meters and energy providers. We illustrate along the use case of privacy preserving load…
▽ More
There has been a large number of contributions on privacy-preserving smart metering with Differential Privacy, addressing questions from actual enforcement at the smart meter to billing at the energy provider. However, exploitation is mostly limited to application of cryptographic security means between smart meters and energy providers. We illustrate along the use case of privacy preserving load forecasting that Differential Privacy is indeed a valuable addition that unlocks novel information flows for optimization. We show that (i) there are large differences in utility along three selected forecasting methods, (ii) energy providers can enjoy good utility especially under the linear regression benchmark model, and (iii) households can participate in privacy preserving load forecasting with an individual re-identification risk < 60%, only 10% over random guessing.
△ Less
Submitted 6 July, 2018;
originally announced July 2018.
