research-article

Global and Local Differentially Private Release of Count-Weighted Graphs

Authors:

Felipe T. Brito,

Victor A. E. Farias,

Subhabrata Majumdar,

Javam C. Machado,

Divesh SrivastavaAuthors Info & Claims

Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data, Volume 1, Issue 2

Article No.: 154, Pages 1 - 25

https://doi.org/10.1145/3589299

Published: 20 June 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Many complex natural and technological systems are commonly modeled as count-weighted graphs, where nodes represent entities, edges model relationships between them, and edge weights define some counting statistics associated with each relationship. As graph data usually contain sensitive information about entities, preserving privacy when releasing this type of data becomes an important issue. In this context, differential privacy (DP) has become the de facto standard for data release under strong privacy guarantees. When dealing with DP for weighted graphs, most state-of-the-art works assume that the graph topology is known. However, in several real-world applications, the privacy of the graph topology also needs to be ensured. In this paper, we aim to bridge the gap between DP and count-weighted graph data release, considering both graph structure and edge weights as private information. We first adapt the weighted graph DP definition to take into account the privacy of the graph structure. We then develop two novel approaches to privately releasing count-weighted graphs under the notions of global and local DP. We also leverage the post-processing property of DP to improve the accuracy of the proposed techniques considering graph domain constraints. Experiments using real-world graph data demonstrate the superiority of our approaches in terms of utility over existing techniques, enabling subsequent computation of a variety of statistics on the released graph with high utility, in some cases comparable to the non-private results.

Supplemental Material

PDF File

Short Presentation Video - Global and Local Differentially Private Release of Count-Weighted Graphs

Download
2.13 MB

References

[1]

Jeremiah Blocki, Avrim Blum, Anupam Datta, and Or Sheffet. 2013. Differentially private data analysis of social networks via restricted sensitivity. In Proceedings of the 4th conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science. 87--96.

Digital Library

[2]

Rui Chen, Benjamin Fung, Philip S Yu, and Bipin C Desai. 2014. Correlated network data publication via differential privacy. The VLDB Journal 23, 4 (2014), 653--676.

Digital Library

[3]

Xiang Cheng, Sen Su, Shengzhi Xu, Li Xiong, Ke Xiao, and Mingxing Zhao. 2018. A two-phase algorithm for differentially private frequent subgraph mining. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 30, 8 (2018), 1411--1425.

Digital Library

[4]

Aaron Clauset, Cristopher Moore, and Mark EJ Newman. 2006. Structural inference of hierarchies in networks. In ICML Workshop on Statistical Network Analysis. Springer, 1--13.

[5]

Graham Cormode, Cecilia Procopiuc, Divesh Srivastava, and Thanh TL Tran. 2012. Differentially private summaries for sparse data. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Database Theory. 299--311.

Digital Library

[6]

Wei-Yen Day, Ninghui Li, and Min Lyu. 2016. Publishing graph degree distribution with node differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Management of Data. 123--138.

Digital Library

[7]

Xiaofeng Ding, Xiaodong Zhang, Zhifeng Bao, and Hai Jin. 2018. Privacy-preserving triangle counting in large graphs. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management. 1283--1292.

Digital Library

[8]

John C Duchi, Michael I Jordan, and Martin J Wainwright. 2013. Local privacy and statistical minimax rates. In 2013 IEEE 54th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 429--438.

Digital Library

[9]

Nick Duffield, Carsten Lund, and Mikkel Thorup. 2005. Learn more, sample less: control of volume and variance in network measurement. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 51, 5 (2005), 1756--1775.

Digital Library

[10]

Nick Duffield, Carsten Lund, and Mikkel Thorup. 2007. Priority sampling for estimation of arbitrary subset sums. Journal of the ACM (JACM) 54, 6 (2007), 32--es.

Digital Library

[11]

Cynthia Dwork. 2006. Differential privacy. In International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming. Springer, 1--12.

[12]

Cynthia Dwork, Frank McSherry, Kobbi Nissim, and Adam Smith. 2006. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In Theory of cryptography conference. Springer, 265--284.

[13]

Chenglin Fan and Ping Li. 2022. Distances Release with Differential Privacy in Tree and Grid Graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.12488 (2022).

[14]

Federal Communications Commission. 2018. Customer privacy. https://www.fcc.gov/general/customer-privacy. Online; accessed 13 October 2022.

[15]

Emilio Ferrara, Onur Varol, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2016. Detection of promoted social media campaigns. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 10. 563--566.

[16]

Tianchong Gao, Feng Li, Yu Chen, and XuKai Zou. 2018. Local differential privately anonymizing online social networks under hrg-based model. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems 5, 4 (2018), 1009--1020.

[17]

Arpita Ghosh, Tim Roughgarden, and Mukund Sundararajan. 2012. Universally utility-maximizing privacy mechanisms. SIAM J. Comput. 41, 6 (2012), 1673--1693.

Digital Library

[18]

Frédéric Gilbert, Paolo Simonetto, Faraz Zaidi, Fabien Jourdan, and Romain Bourqui. 2011. Communities and hierarchical structures in dynamic social networks: analysis and visualization. Social Network Analysis and Mining 1, 2 (2011), 83--95.

[19]

Samuel Haney, Ashwin Machanavajjhala, John M Abowd, Matthew Graham, Mark Kutzbach, and Lars Vilhuber. 2017. Utility cost of formal privacy for releasing national employer-employee statistics. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Management of Data. 1339--1354.

Digital Library

[20]

Moritz Hardt and Aaron Roth. 2012. Beating randomized response on incoherent matrices. In Proceedings of the forty-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. 1255--1268.

Digital Library

[21]

W Keith Hastings. 1970. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. (1970).

[22]

Michael Hay, Chao Li, Gerome Miklau, and David Jensen. 2009. Accurate estimation of the degree distribution of private networks. In 2009 Ninth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE, 169--178.

Digital Library

[23]

Haiping Huang, Dongjun Zhang, Fu Xiao, Kai Wang, Jiateng Gu, and Ruchuan Wang. 2020. Privacy-preserving approach PBCN in social network with differential privacy. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management 17, 2 (2020), 931--945.

Digital Library

[24]

Masooma Iftikhar, Qing Wang, and Yu Lin. 2020. dk-microaggregation: Anonymizing graphs with differential privacy guarantees. In Pacific-Asia Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Springer, 191--203.

Digital Library

[25]

Jacob Imola, Takao Murakami, and Kamalika Chaudhuri. 2021. Locally differentially private analysis of graph statistics. In 30th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 21). 983--1000.

[26]

Brian Karrer and Mark EJ Newman. 2011. Stochastic blockmodels and community structure in networks. Physical review E 83, 1 (2011), 016107.

[27]

Vishesh Karwa, Sofya Raskhodnikova, Adam Smith, and Grigory Yaroslavtsev. 2011. Private analysis of graph structure. PVLDB 4, 11 (2011), 1146--1157.

Digital Library

[28]

Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan, Kobbi Nissim, Sofya Raskhodnikova, and Adam Smith. 2013. Analyzing graphs with node differential privacy. In Theory of Cryptography Conference. Springer, 457--476.

Digital Library

[29]

Danai Koutra, Ankur Parikh, Aaditya Ramdas, and Jing Xiang. 2011. Algorithms for graph similarity and subgraph matching. In Proc. Ecol. inference conf, Vol. 17. Citeseer.

[30]

Jerome Le Ny and George J Pappas. 2013. Privacy-preserving release of aggregate dynamic models. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM international conference on High confidence networked systems. 49--56.

[31]

Jure Leskovec, Lada A Adamic, and Bernardo A Huberman. 2007. The dynamics of viral marketing. ACM Transactions on the Web (TWEB) 1, 1 (2007), 5--es.

Digital Library

[32]

Xiaoye Li, Jing Yang, Zhenlong Sun, and Jianpei Zhang. 2017. Differential privacy for edge weights in social networks. Security and Communication Networks 2017 (2017).

[33]

Priya Mahadevan, Dmitri Krioukov, Kevin Fall, and Amin Vahdat. 2006. Systematic topology analysis and generation using degree correlations. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 36, 4 (2006), 135--146.

Digital Library

[34]

Ronald Manríquez, Camilo Guerrero-Nancuante, Felipe Martínez, and Carla Taramasco. 2021. Spread of epidemic disease on edge-weighted graphs from a database: A case study of covid-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 9 (2021), 4432.

[35]

Rossana Mastrandrea, Julie Fournet, and Alain Barrat. 2015. Contact patterns in a high school: a comparison between data collected using wearable sensors, contact diaries and friendship surveys. PloS one 10, 9 (2015), e0136497.

[36]

Frank McSherry and Kunal Talwar. 2007. Mechanism design via differential privacy. In 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'07). IEEE, 94--103.

Digital Library

[37]

Frank D McSherry. 2009. Privacy integrated queries: an extensible platform for privacy-preserving data analysis. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of data. 19--30.

Digital Library

[38]

Andrés Muñoz Medina and Jenny Gillenwater. 2020. Duff: A dataset-distance-based utility function family for the exponential mechanism. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.04235 (2020).

[39]

Mark EJ Newman. 2003. The structure and function of complex networks. SIAM review 45, 2 (2003), 167--256.

[40]

Hiep H Nguyen, Abdessamad Imine, and Michaël Rusinowitch. 2015. Differentially private publication of social graphs at linear cost. In 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM). IEEE, 596--599.

Digital Library

[41]

Bo Ning, Yunhao Sun, Xiaoyu Tao, and Guanyu Li. 2021. Differential privacy protection on weighted graph in wireless networks. Ad Hoc Networks 110 (2021), 102303.

[42]

Kobbi Nissim, Sofya Raskhodnikova, and Adam Smith. 2007. Smooth sensitivity and sampling in private data analysis. In Proceedings of the thirty-ninth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing. 75--84.

Digital Library

[43]

Tiago P. Peixoto. 2014. The graph-tool python library. figshare (2014). https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1164194

[44]

Rafael Pinot, Anne Morvan, Florian Yger, Cédric Gouy-Pailler, and Jamal Atif. 2018. Graph-based clustering under differential privacy. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.03831 (2018).

[45]

Qing Qian, Zhixu Li, Pengpeng Zhao, Wei Chen, Hongzhi Yin, and Lei Zhao. 2018. Publishing graph node strength histogram with edge differential privacy. In International Conference on Database Systems for Advanced Applications. Springer, 75--91.

Digital Library

[46]

Zhan Qin, Ting Yu, Yin Yang, Issa Khalil, Xiaokui Xiao, and Kui Ren. 2017. Generating synthetic decentralized social graphs with local differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 425--438.

Digital Library

[47]

Alessandra Sala, Xiaohan Zhao, Christo Wilson, Haitao Zheng, and Ben Y Zhao. 2011. Sharing graphs using differentially private graph models. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement conference. 81--98.

Digital Library

[48]

Adam Sealfon. 2016. Shortest paths and distances with differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 35th ACM SIGMODSIGACT- SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems. 29--41.

Digital Library

[49]

Haipei Sun, Xiaokui Xiao, Issa Khalil, Yin Yang, Zhan Qin, HuiWang, and Ting Yu. 2019. Analyzing subgraph statistics from extended local views with decentralized differential privacy. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 703--717.

Digital Library

[50]

Dong Tong, Zeng Yong, Liu Mengli, Liu Zhihong, Ma Jianfeng, and Zhu Xiaoyan. 2019. A topology based differential privacy scheme for average path length query. In 2019 International Conference on Networking and Network Applications (NaNA). IEEE, 350--355.

[51]

United States Census Bureau. 2021. Census Bureau Sets Key Parameters to Protect Privacy in 2020 Census Results. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/2020-census-key-parameters.html. Online; accessed 10 January 2023.

[52]

Onur Varol, Emilio Ferrara, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2017. Early detection of promoted campaigns on social media. EPJ data science 6 (2017), 1--19.

[53]

Trung Vu and Raviv Raich. 2021. On Asymptotic Linear Convergence of Projected Gradient Descent for Constrained Least Squares. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11760 (2021).

[54]

Dan Wang and Shigong Long. 2019. Boosting the accuracy of differentially private in weighted social networks. Multimedia Tools and Applications 78, 24 (2019), 34801--34817.

[55]

Yue Wang and Xintao Wu. 2013. Preserving differential privacy in degree-correlation based graph generation. Transactions on data privacy 6, 2 (2013), 127.

Digital Library

[56]

Yuye Wang, Jing Yang, and Jianpei Zhang. 2020. Differential privacy for weighted network based on probability model. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 80792--80800.

[57]

Qian Xiao, Rui Chen, and Kian-Lee Tan. 2014. Differentially private network data release via structural inference. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 911--920.

Digital Library

[58]

Qingqing Ye, Haibo Hu, Man Ho Au, Xiaofeng Meng, and Xiaokui Xiao. 2020. LF-GDPR: A framework for estimating graph metrics with local differential privacy. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering (2020).

[59]

Qingqing Ye, Haibo Hu, Man Ho Au, Xiaofeng Meng, and Xiaokui Xiao. 2020. Towards locally differentially private generic graph metric estimation. In 2020 IEEE 36th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE). IEEE, 1922-- 1925.

[60]

Jun Zhang, Graham Cormode, Cecilia M Procopiuc, Divesh Srivastava, and Xiaokui Xiao. 2015. Private release of graph statistics using ladder functions. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data. 731--745.

Digital Library

[61]

Keyu Zhu, Pascal Van Hentenryck, and Ferdinando Fioretto. 2021. Bias and Variance of Post-processing in Differential Privacy. In Thirty-Fifth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, 11177--11184.

Cited By

Brito FMachado J(2024)Differentially Private Release of Count-Weighted GraphsAnais Estendidos do XXXIX Simpósio Brasileiro de Banco de Dados (SBBD Estendido 2024)10.5753/sbbd_estendido.2024.241221(183-189)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.5753/sbbd_estendido.2024.241221
Liu YWang TLiu YChen HLi C(2024)Edge-Protected Triangle Count Estimation Under Relationship Local Differential PrivacyIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering10.1109/TKDE.2024.338183236:10(5138-5152)Online publication date: 26-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TKDE.2024.3381832
Bi YWu YLiu JRen KXiong L(2024)When Data Pricing Meets Non-Cooperative Game Theory2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE)10.1109/ICDE60146.2024.00443(5548-5559)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE60146.2024.00443

Index Terms

Global and Local Differentially Private Release of Count-Weighted Graphs
1. Security and privacy
  1. Database and storage security
    1. Data anonymization and sanitization

Recommendations

A differentially private algorithm for location data release

The rise of mobile technologies in recent years has led to large volumes of location information, which are valuable resources for knowledge discovery such as travel patterns mining and traffic analysis. However, location dataset has been confronted ...
Differentially private data release for data mining
KDD '11: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining

Privacy-preserving data publishing addresses the problem of disclosing sensitive data when mining for useful information. Among the existing privacy models, ∈-differential privacy provides one of the strongest privacy guarantees and has no assumptions ...
On the complexity of differentially private data release: efficient algorithms and hardness results
STOC '09: Proceedings of the forty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing

We consider private data analysis in the setting in which a trusted and trustworthy curator, having obtained a large data set containing private information, releases to the public a "sanitization" of the data set that simultaneously protects the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data

Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data Volume 1, Issue 2

PACMMOD

June 2023

2310 pages

EISSN:2836-6573

DOI:10.1145/3605748

Editor:
Divyakant Agrawal
UC Santa Barbara, United States

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2023 ACM.

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].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 20 June 2023

Published in PACMMOD Volume 1, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
383
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)220
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Brito FMachado J(2024)Differentially Private Release of Count-Weighted GraphsAnais Estendidos do XXXIX Simpósio Brasileiro de Banco de Dados (SBBD Estendido 2024)10.5753/sbbd_estendido.2024.241221(183-189)Online publication date: 14-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.5753/sbbd_estendido.2024.241221
Liu YWang TLiu YChen HLi C(2024)Edge-Protected Triangle Count Estimation Under Relationship Local Differential PrivacyIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering10.1109/TKDE.2024.338183236:10(5138-5152)Online publication date: 26-Mar-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/TKDE.2024.3381832
Bi YWu YLiu JRen KXiong L(2024)When Data Pricing Meets Non-Cooperative Game Theory2024 IEEE 40th International Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE)10.1109/ICDE60146.2024.00443(5548-5559)Online publication date: 13-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE60146.2024.00443

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents