Tight on Budget?: Tight Bounds for r-Fold Approximate Differential Privacy
Sebastian Meiser, Esfandiar Mohammadi
Abstract
Many applications, such as anonymous communication systems, privacy-enhancing database queries, or privacy-enhancing machine-learning methods, require robust guarantees under thousands and sometimes millions of observations. The notion of r-fold approximate differential privacy (ADP) offers a well-established framework with a precise characterization of the degree of privacy after r observations of an attacker. However, existing bounds for r-fold ADP are loose and, if used for estimating the required degree of noise for an application, can lead to over-cautious choices for perturbation randomness and thus to suboptimal utility or overly high costs. We present a numerical and widely applicable method for capturing the privacy loss of differentially private mechanisms under composition, which we call privacy buckets. With privacy buckets we compute provable upper and lower bounds for ADP for a given number of observations. We compare our bounds with state-of-the-art bounds for r-fold ADP, including Kairouz, Oh, and Viswanath's composition theorem (KOV), concentrated differential privacy and the moments accountant. While KOV proved optimal bounds for heterogeneous adaptive k-fold composition, we show that for concrete sequences of mechanisms tighter bounds can be derived by taking the mechanisms' structure into account. We compare previous bounds for the Laplace mechanism, the Gauss mechanism, for a timing leakage reduction mechanism, and for the stochastic gradient descent and we significantly improve over their results (except that we match the KOV bound for the Laplace mechanism, for which it seems tight). Our lower bounds almost meet our upper bounds, showing that no significantly tighter bounds are possible.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Your agent calls
Lunesearch_papers
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers get 18173b61-8fee-42fa-8707-2a4b812ed128Cited by top-tier papers14
- The Discrete Gaussian for Differential PrivacyClément L. Canonne, Gautam Kamath, Thomas SteinkeNeurIPS 2020 · 355 citations
- Numerical Composition of Differential PrivacySivakanth Gopi, Yin Tat Lee, Lukas WutschitzNeurIPS 2021 · 259 citations
- The Skellam Mechanism for Differentially Private Federated LearningNaman Agarwal, Peter Kairouz, Ziyu LiuNeurIPS 2021 · 161 citations
- Scalable DP-SGD: Shuffling vs. Poisson SubsamplingLynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 29 citations
- How Private are DP-SGD Implementations?Lynn Chua, Badih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar et al.ICML 2024 · 25 citations
Related papers
- The Saddle-Point Method in Differential PrivacyWael Alghamdi, Juan Felipe Gómez, Shahab Asoodeh, Flávio P. Calmon et al.ICML 2023 · 16 citations
- Individual Privacy Accounting with Gaussian Differential PrivacyAntti Koskela, Marlon Tobaben, Antti HonkelaICLR 2023 · 2 citations
- Faster Privacy Accounting via Evolving DiscretizationBadih Ghazi, Pritish Kamath, Ravi Kumar, Pasin ManurangsiICML 2022 · 20 citations
- Optimal Differential Privacy Composition for Exponential MechanismsJinshuo Dong, David Durfee, Ryan RogersICML 2020 · 52 citations
- Fully-Adaptive Composition in Differential PrivacyJustin Whitehouse, Aaditya Ramdas, Ryan Rogers, Steven WuICML 2023 · 56 citations
