REVIEW 2 cited by
On Adaptive Attacks to Adversarial Example Defenses
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Adaptive attacks have (rightfully) become the de facto standard for evaluating defenses to adversarial examples. We find, however, that typical adaptive evaluations are incomplete. We demonstrate that thirteen defenses recently published at ICLR, ICML and NeurIPS---and chosen for illustrative and pedagogical purposes---can be circumvented despite attempting to perform evaluations using adaptive attacks. While prior evaluation papers focused mainly on the end result---showing that a defense was ineffective---this paper focuses on laying out the methodology and the approach necessary to perform an adaptive attack. We hope that these analyses will serve as guidance on how to properly perform adaptive attacks against defenses to adversarial examples, and thus will allow the community to make further progress in building more robust models.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Disentangling Safe and Unsafe Corruptions via Anisotropy and Locality
Projected Displacement assigns low threat to safe corruptions like blur and noise even at large norms, and high threat to perturbations aligned with label-changing directions.
-
Attacking Graph Foundation Models Through Their Shared Representation
A shared representation layer in graph foundation models is a distinct attack surface: input edits break three of six models and one spectral tokenizer is uniquely fragile.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.