A Separation Result Between Data-oblivious and Data-aware Poisoning Attacks
Samuel Deng, Sanjam Garg, Somesh Jha, Saeed Mahloujifar, Mohammad Mahmoody, Abhradeep Guha Thakurta
Abstract
Poisoning attacks have emerged as a significant security threat to machine learning algorithms. It has been demonstrated that adversaries who make small changes to the training set, such as adding specially crafted data points, can hurt the performance of the output model. Some of the stronger poisoning attacks require the full knowledge of the training data. This leaves open the possibility of achieving the same attack results using poisoning attacks that do not have the full knowledge of the clean training set. In this work, we initiate a theoretical study of the problem above. Specifically, for the case of feature selection with LASSO, we show that full-information adversaries (that craft poisoning examples based on the rest of the training data) are provably stronger than the optimal attacker that is oblivious to the training set yet has access to the distribution of the data. Our separation result shows that the two setting of data-aware and data-oblivious are fundamentally different and we cannot hope to always achieve the same attack or defense results in these scenarios.
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 dc6f07e7-5d84-4a02-bbc0-322e4e60cd56Cited by top-tier papers2
- Uncovering Adversarial Risks of Test-Time AdaptationTong Wu, Feiran Jia, Xiangyu Qi, Jiachen T. Wang et al.ICML 2023 · 12 citations
- The Full Landscape of Robust Mean Testing: Sharp Separations between Oblivious and Adaptive ContaminationClément L. Canonne, Samuel B. Hopkins, Jerry Li, Allen Liu et al.FOCS 2023 · 1 citation
Builds on6
- Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural NetworksNicholas Carlini, David A. WagnerS&P 2017 · 9,786 citations
- Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning ModelsReza Shokri, Marco Stronati, Congzheng Song, Vitaly ShmatikovS&P 2017 · 5,137 citations
- Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations Against Deep Neural NetworksNicolas Papernot, Patrick D. McDaniel, Xi Wu, Somesh Jha et al.S&P 2016 · 3,275 citations
- On Adaptive Attacks to Adversarial Example DefensesFlorian Tramèr, Nicholas Carlini, Wieland Brendel, Aleksander MadryNeurIPS 2020 · 1,026 citations
- When Does Machine Learning FAIL? Generalized Transferability for Evasion and Poisoning AttacksOctavian Suciu, Radu Marginean, Yigitcan Kaya, Hal Daumé III et al.USENIX Security 2018 · 321 citations
Related papers
- Manipulating Machine Learning: Poisoning Attacks and Countermeasures for Regression LearningMatthew Jagielski, Alina Oprea, Battista Biggio, Chang Liu et al.S&P 2018 · 867 citations
- The Perils of Learning From Unlabeled Data: Backdoor Attacks on Semi-supervised LearningVirat Shejwalkar, Lingjuan Lyu, Amir HoumansadrICCV 2023 · 15 citations
- Model-Targeted Poisoning Attacks with Provable ConvergenceFnu Suya, Saeed Mahloujifar, Anshuman Suri, David Evans et al.ICML 2021 · 52 citations
- Poisoning the Unlabeled Dataset of Semi-Supervised LearningNicholas CarliniUSENIX Security 2021 · 80 citations
- What Distributions are Robust to Indiscriminate Poisoning Attacks for Linear Learners?Fnu Suya, Xiao Zhang, Yuan Tian, David EvansNeurIPS 2023 · 3 citations
