Curator Attack: When Blackbox Differential Privacy Auditing Loses Its Power
Shiming Wang, Liyao Xiang, Bowei Cheng, Zhe Ji, Tianran Sun, Xinbing Wang
Abstract
A surge in data-driven applications enhances everyday life but also raises serious concerns about private information leakage. Hence many privacy auditing tools are emerging for checking if the data sanitization performed meets the privacy standard of the data owner. Blackbox auditing for differential privacy is particularly gaining popularity for its effectiveness and applicability to a wide range of scenarios. Yet, we identified that blackbox auditing is essentially flawed with its setting -small probabilities/densities are ignored due to inaccurate observation. Our argument is based on a solid false positive analysis from a hypothesis testing perspective, which is missed out by prior blackbox auditing tools. This oversight greatly reduces the reliability of these tools, as it allows malicious or incapable data curators to pass the auditing with an overstated privacy guarantee, posing significant risks to data owners. We demonstrate the practical existence of such threats in classical differential privacy mechanisms against four representative blackbox auditors with experimental validations. Our findings aim to reveal the limitations of blackbox auditing tools, empower the data owner with the awareness of risks in using these tools, and encourage the development of more reliable differential privacy auditing methods. CCS Concepts • Security and privacy → Privacy-preserving protocols.
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 41f33eeb-ee76-4dd0-ae49-3deaf6ee3068Builds on15
- Auditing Differentially Private Machine Learning: How Private is Private SGD?Matthew Jagielski, Jonathan R. Ullman, Alina OpreaNeurIPS 2020 · 354 citations
- Adversary Instantiation: Lower Bounds for Differentially Private Machine LearningMilad Nasr, Shuang Song, Abhradeep Thakurta, Nicolas Papernot et al.S&P 2021 · 288 citations
- ProPILE: Probing Privacy Leakage in Large Language ModelsSiwon Kim, Sangdoo Yun, Hwaran Lee, Martin Gubri et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 229 citations
- Privacy Auditing with One (1) Training RunThomas Steinke, Milad Nasr, Matthew JagielskiNeurIPS 2023 · 178 citations
- Detecting Violations of Differential PrivacyZeyu Ding, Yuxin Wang, Guanhong Wang, Danfeng Zhang et al.CCS 2018 · 156 citations
Related papers
- General-Purpose f-DP Estimation and Auditing in a Black-Box SettingÖnder Askin, Holger Dette, Martin Dunsche, Tim Kutta et al.USENIX Security 2025
- Sequentially Auditing Differential PrivacyTomás González Lara, Mateo Dulce-Rubio, Aaditya Ramdas, Mónica RiberoNeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
- Tight Auditing of Differentially Private Machine LearningMilad Nasr, Jamie Hayes, Thomas Steinke, Borja Balle et al.USENIX Security 2023
- Nearly Tight Black-Box Auditing of Differentially Private Machine LearningMeenatchi Sundaram Muthu Selva Annamalai, Emiliano De CristofaroNeurIPS 2024 · 32 citations
- Eureka: A General Framework for Black-box Differential Privacy EstimatorsYun Lu, Malik Magdon-Ismail, Yu Wei, Vassilis ZikasS&P 2024 · 16 citations
