Auditing -differential privacy in one run
Saeed Mahloujifar, Luca Melis, Kamalika Chaudhuri
Abstract
Empirical auditing has emerged as a means of catching some of the flaws in the implementation of privacy-preserving algorithms. Existing auditing mechanisms, however, are either computationally inefficient -requiring multiple runs of the machine learning algorithms --or suboptimal in calculating an empirical privacy. In this work, we present a tight and efficient auditing procedure and analysis that can effectively assess the privacy of mechanisms. Our approach is efficient; similar to the recent work of Steinke, Nasr, and Jagielski (2023), our auditing procedure leverages the randomness of examples in the input dataset and requires only a single run of the target mechanism. And it is more accurate; we provide a novel analysis that enables us to achieve tight empirical privacy estimates by using the hypothesized f -DP curve of the mechanism, which provides a more accurate measure of privacy than the traditional ϵ, δ differential privacy parameters. We use our auditing procure and analysis to obtain empirical privacy, demonstrating that our auditing procedure delivers tighter privacy estimates.
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 e1b692d1-3e49-4741-a754-996842311a60Cited by top-tier papers13
- To Shuffle or not to Shuffle: Auditing DP-SGD with ShufflingMeenatchi Sundaram Muthu Selva Annamalai, Borja Balle, Jamie Hayes, Emiliano De CristofaroNDSS 2026 · 11 citations
- How Well Can Differential Privacy Be Audited in One Run?Amit Keinan, Moshe Shenfeld, Katrina LigettNeurIPS 2025 · 10 citations
- Benchmarking Empirical Privacy Protection for Adaptations of Large Language ModelsBartlomiej Marek, Lorenzo Rossi, Vincent Hanke, Xun Wang et al.ICLR 2026 · 8 citations
- Optimizing Canaries for Privacy Auditing with Metagradient DescentMatteo Boglioni, Terrance Liu, Andrew Ilyas, Steven WuICLR 2026 · 7 citations
- Sequentially Auditing Differential PrivacyTomás González Lara, Mateo Dulce-Rubio, Aaditya Ramdas, Mónica RiberoNeurIPS 2025 · 6 citations
Builds on31
- 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
- Membership Inference Attacks From First PrinciplesNicholas Carlini, Steve Chien, Milad Nasr, Shuang Song et al.S&P 2022 · 1,049 citations
- Machine Learning with Membership Privacy using Adversarial RegularizationMilad Nasr, Reza Shokri, Amir HoumansadrCCS 2018 · 543 citations
- MemGuard: Defending against Black-Box Membership Inference Attacks via Adversarial ExamplesJinyuan Jia, Ahmed Salem, Michael Backes, Yang Zhang et al.CCS 2019 · 464 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
- Privacy Audit as Bits Transmission: (Im)possibilities for Audit by One RunZihang Xiang, Tianhao Wang, Di WangUSENIX Security 2025
- Sequential Auditing for f-Differential PrivacyTim Kutta, Martin Dunsche, Yu Wei, Vassilis ZikasUSENIX Security 2026
- One-shot Empirical Privacy Estimation for Federated LearningGalen Andrew, Peter Kairouz, Sewoong Oh, Alina Oprea et al.ICLR 2024 · 48 citations
- Privacy Auditing with One (1) Training RunThomas Steinke, Milad Nasr, Matthew JagielskiNeurIPS 2023 · 178 citations
