Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3284028.3284032acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmiddlewareConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Exploratory Study of Privacy Preserving Fraud Detection

Published: 10 December 2018 Publication History

Abstract

With the wide adoption of the Internet, digital transactions surge exponentially and so do the impersonation fraud. While machine learning techniques show strong promise to be the building block for digital fraud detection systems, clients may be reluctant to share the raw data with such systems due to privacy concerns. The emerging privacy preserving machine learning techniques that employ homomorphic encryption to resolve this conundrum unfortunately increases the computational overhead of detection. In this paper, we present a first-of-a-kind empirical performance study of a private fraud detection system developed at SiS ID, a French business security platform. A privacy-preserving decision tree which can classify transactions into four risk classes (safe, moderately risky, very risky and fraud) is trained on more than 160000 real world transactions, and we quantitatively compare the classification accuracy, latency and network bandwidth under various combinations of encryption parameters and learning hyper-parameters, in order to explore the impact of the configuration on the performances. Our results show that the computation and communication overhead of processing encrypted data increases by an order of magnitude of 5, and highly depends on the configuration of the encryption key and the number of nodes in the decision tree.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (p25-canillas.mp4)

References

[1]
A. Williams. 2017 (accessed February 1, 2018). Fraudsters Target UK Directors Through Companies House. The Financial Time. (2017 (accessed February 1, 2018)).
[2]
M. Al, T. Chanyaswad, and S. Y. Kung. 2018. Multi-Kernel, Deep Neural Network and Hybrid Models for Privacy Preserving Machine Learning. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). 2891--2895.
[3]
B. Sullivan. 2017 (accessed February 1, 2018). Identity Theft Hit an All-Time High in 2016. USA Today. (2017 (accessed February 1, 2018)).
[4]
Raphael Bost, Raluca Ada Popa, Stephen Tu, and Shafi Goldwasser. 2015. Machine Learning Classification over Encrypted Data. Proceedings 2015 Network and Distributed System Security Symposium February (2015), 1--31.
[5]
Cynthia Dwork. 2008. Differential privacy: A survey of results. In International Conference on Theory and Applications of Models of Computation. Springer, 1--19.
[6]
Euler Hermes. 2016 (accessed February 1, 2018. French fraud study reveals rapidly increasing business cyber crime threat. DFCG. (2016 (accessed February 1, 2018).
[7]
Oded Goldreich. 1998. Secure multi-party computation. Manuscript. Preliminary version 78 (1998).
[8]
S. Halevi. (accessed November 7, 2017). HElib - An Implementation of Homomorphic Encryption. https://github.com/shaih/HElib. ((accessed November 7, 2017)).
[9]
Arjen K. Lenstra and Eric R. Verheul. 2001. Selecting cryptographic key sizes. Journal of Cryptology 14, 4 (2001), 255--293.
[10]
Goldreich Oded. 2004. Foundations of Cryptography. Basic Applications, vol. 2. (2004).
[11]
P Paillier. {n. d.}. Public-Key Cryptosystems Based on Composite Degree Residuosity Classes. In International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques (EUROCRYPT 99).
[12]
O. Regnier-Coudert and J. McCall. 2011. Privacy-preserving Approach to Bayesian Network Structure Learning from Distributed Data. In The 13th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (GECCO '11). Dublin, Ireland.
[13]
S. Samet and A. Miri. 2009. Privacy-Preserving Bayesian Network for Horizontally Partitioned Data. In The 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering, Vol. 3.
[14]
G. Szucs. 2013. Random Response Forest for Privacy-Preserving Classification. Journal of Computational Engineering (2013).
[15]
Qiang Zhu and Xixiang Lv. 2018. 2P-DNN: Privacy-Preserving Deep Neural Networks Based on Homomorphic Cryptosystem. CoRR abs/1807.08459 (2018). arXiv:1807.08459 http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.08459

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Battle of Wits: To What Extent Can Fraudsters Disguise Their Tracks in International bypass Fraud?Proceedings of the 19th ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security10.1145/3634737.3657023(366-382)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Machine Learning Methods for Credit Card Fraud Detection: A SurveyIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.348729812(158939-158965)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Exploring Machine Learning Models for Federated Learning: A Review of Approaches, Performance, and LimitationsDynamics of Disasters10.1007/978-3-031-74006-0_4(87-121)Online publication date: 25-Sep-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
Middleware '18: Proceedings of the 19th International Middleware Conference Industry
December 2018
64 pages
ISBN:9781450360166
DOI:10.1145/3284028
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 10 December 2018

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Funding Sources

Conference

Middleware '18
Sponsor:
  • ACM
  • USENIX Assoc
  • IFIP

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 203 of 948 submissions, 21%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)21
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Battle of Wits: To What Extent Can Fraudsters Disguise Their Tracks in International bypass Fraud?Proceedings of the 19th ACM Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security10.1145/3634737.3657023(366-382)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Machine Learning Methods for Credit Card Fraud Detection: A SurveyIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.348729812(158939-158965)Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)Exploring Machine Learning Models for Federated Learning: A Review of Approaches, Performance, and LimitationsDynamics of Disasters10.1007/978-3-031-74006-0_4(87-121)Online publication date: 25-Sep-2024
  • (2023)Locally Differentially Private Embedding Models in Distributed Fraud Prevention Systems2023 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW)10.1109/ICDMW60847.2023.00068(475-484)Online publication date: 4-Dec-2023
  • (2022)PUBA: Privacy-Preserving User-Data Bookkeeping and AnalyticsProceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies10.2478/popets-2022-00542022:2(447-516)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2022
  • (2022)Secret-Shared Joins with Multiplicity from Aggregation TreesProceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security10.1145/3548606.3560670(209-222)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2022

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media