USENIX Security2023Top-tier venue
The Space of Adversarial Strategies
Ryan Sheatsley, Blaine Hoak, Eric Pauley, Patrick D. McDaniel
Abstract
Adversarial examples, inputs designed to induce worst-case behavior in machine learning models, have been extensively studied over the past decade. Yet, our understanding of this phenomenon stems from a rather fragmented pool of knowledge; at present, there are a handful of attacks, each with disparate assumptions in threat models and incomparable definitions of optimality. In this paper, we propose a systematic approach to characterize worst-case (i.e., optimal) adversaries. We first introduce an extensible decomposition of attacks in adversarial machine learning by atomizing attack components into surfaces and travelers. With our decomposition, we enumerate over components to create 576 attacks (568 of which were previously unexplored). Next, we propose the Pareto Ensemble Attack (PEA): a theoretical attack that upper-bounds attack performance. With our new attacks, we measure performance relative to the PEA on: both robust and non-robust models, seven datasets, and three extended pbased threat models incorporating compute costs, formalizing the Space of Adversarial Strategies. From our evaluation we find that attack performance to be highly contextual: the domain, model robustness, and threat model can have a profound influence on attack efficacy. Our investigation suggests that future studies measuring the security of machine learning should: (1) be contextualized to the domain & threat models, and (2) go beyond the handful of known attacks used today.
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 f82385bf-4e7f-4575-887c-8c7698fbdf3fCited by top-tier papers2
- Towards More Practical Threat Models in Artificial Intelligence SecurityKathrin Grosse, Lukas Bieringer, Tarek R. Besold, Alexandre AlahiUSENIX Security 2024 · 27 citations
- Fight Fire with Fire: Combating Adversarial Patch Attacks using Pattern-randomized Defensive PatchesJianan Feng, Jiachun Li, Changqing Miao, Jianjun Huang et al.S&P 2025
Builds on11
- Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Neural NetworksNicholas Carlini, David A. WagnerS&P 2017 · 9,786 citations
- Reliable evaluation of adversarial robustness with an ensemble of diverse parameter-free attacksFrancesco Croce, Matthias HeinICML 2020 · 2,337 citations
- Minimally distorted Adversarial Examples with a Fast Adaptive Boundary AttackFrancesco Croce, Matthias HeinICML 2020 · 597 citations
- Why Do Adversarial Attacks Transfer? Explaining Transferability of Evasion and Poisoning AttacksAmbra Demontis, Marco Melis, Maura Pintor, Matthew Jagielski et al.USENIX Security 2019 · 466 citations
- Intriguing Properties of Adversarial ML Attacks in the Problem SpaceFabio Pierazzi, Feargus Pendlebury, Jacopo Cortellazzi, Lorenzo CavallaroS&P 2020 · 334 citations
Related papers
- MultiRobustBench: Benchmarking Robustness Against Multiple AttacksSihui Dai, Saeed Mahloujifar, Chong Xiang, Vikash Sehwag et al.ICML 2023 · 11 citations
- Adversarial Attack Generation Empowered by Min-Max OptimizationJingkang Wang, Tianyun Zhang, Sijia Liu, Pin-Yu Chen et al.NeurIPS 2021 · 49 citations
- Composite Adversarial AttacksXiaofeng Mao, Yuefeng Chen, Shuhui Wang, Hang Su et al.AAAI 2021 · 60 citations
- DEEPSEC: A Uniform Platform for Security Analysis of Deep Learning ModelXiang Ling, Shouling Ji, Jiaxu Zou, Jiannan Wang et al.S&P 2019 · 147 citations
- Reliable Robustness Evaluation via Automatically Constructed Attack EnsemblesShengcai Liu, Fu Peng, Ke TangAAAI 2023 · 14 citations
