Quantifying identifiability to choose and audit epsilon in differentially private deep learning
Daniel Bernau, Günther Eibl, Philip-William 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 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 ).
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 139f0695-abc9-4e16-b912-5ee82b1054e3Builds on5
- Deep Learning with Differential PrivacyMartín Abadi, Andy Chu, Ian J. Goodfellow, H. Brendan McMahan et al.CCS 2016 · 7,620 citations
- Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning ModelsReza Shokri, Marco Stronati, Congzheng Song, Vitaly ShmatikovS&P 2017 · 5,137 citations
- Evaluating Differentially Private Machine Learning in PracticeBargav Jayaraman, David EvansUSENIX Security 2019 · 586 citations
- Differentially Private Learning with Adaptive ClippingGalen Andrew, Om Thakkar, Brendan McMahan, Swaroop RamaswamyNeurIPS 2021 · 425 citations
- GAN-Leaks: A Taxonomy of Membership Inference Attacks against Generative ModelsDingfan Chen, Ning Yu, Yang Zhang, Mario FritzCCS 2020 · 278 citations
Related papers
- A General Framework for Auditing Differentially Private Machine LearningFred Lu, Joseph Munoz, Maya Fuchs, Tyler LeBlond et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 57 citations
- Beyond Membership: Limitations of Add/Remove Adjacency in Differential PrivacyGauri Pradhan, Joonas Jälkö, Santiago Zanella-Béguelin, Antti HonkelaICLR 2026
- Adversary Instantiation: Lower Bounds for Differentially Private Machine LearningMilad Nasr, Shuang Song, Abhradeep Thakurta, Nicolas Papernot et al.S&P 2021 · 288 citations
- Bayesian Estimation of Differential PrivacySantiago Zanella-Béguelin, Lukas Wutschitz, Shruti Tople, Ahmed Salem et al.ICML 2023 · 50 citations
- Closed-Form Bounds for DP-SGD against Record-level InferenceGiovanni Cherubin, Boris Köpf, Andrew Paverd, Shruti Tople et al.USENIX Security 2024 · 2 citations
