REVIEW 1 cited by
Holistic risk assessment of inference attacks in machine learning
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
As machine learning expanding application, there are more and more unignorable privacy and safety issues. Especially inference attacks against Machine Learning models allow adversaries to infer sensitive information about the target model, such as training data, model parameters, etc. Inference attacks can lead to serious consequences, including violating individuals privacy, compromising the intellectual property of the owner of the machine learning model. As far as concerned, researchers have studied and analyzed in depth several types of inference attacks, albeit in isolation, but there is still a lack of a holistic rick assessment of inference attacks against machine learning models, such as their application in different scenarios, the common factors affecting the performance of these attacks and the relationship among the attacks. As a result, this paper performs a holistic risk assessment of different inference attacks against Machine Learning models. This paper focuses on three kinds of representative attacks: membership inference attack, attribute inference attack and model stealing attack. And a threat model taxonomy is established. A total of 12 target models using three model architectures, including AlexNet, ResNet18 and Simple CNN, are trained on four datasets, namely CelebA, UTKFace, STL10 and FMNIST.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
A Survey on Privacy Risks and Protection in Large Language Models
The paper surveys LLM privacy leaks and attacks, organizes them into a taxonomy, and reviews defenses without adding new empirical results.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.