-
Diffusion Denoising as a Certified Defense against Clean-label Poisoning
Authors:
Sanghyun Hong,
Nicholas Carlini,
Alexey Kurakin
Abstract:
We present a certified defense to clean-label poisoning attacks. These attacks work by injecting a small number of poisoning samples (e.g., 1%) that contain $p$-norm bounded adversarial perturbations into the training data to induce a targeted misclassification of a test-time input. Inspired by the adversarial robustness achieved by $denoised$ $smoothing$, we show how an off-the-shelf diffusion mo…
▽ More
We present a certified defense to clean-label poisoning attacks. These attacks work by injecting a small number of poisoning samples (e.g., 1%) that contain $p$-norm bounded adversarial perturbations into the training data to induce a targeted misclassification of a test-time input. Inspired by the adversarial robustness achieved by $denoised$ $smoothing$, we show how an off-the-shelf diffusion model can sanitize the tampered training data. We extensively test our defense against seven clean-label poisoning attacks and reduce their attack success to 0-16% with only a negligible drop in the test time accuracy. We compare our defense with existing countermeasures against clean-label poisoning, showing that the defense reduces the attack success the most and offers the best model utility. Our results highlight the need for future work on developing stronger clean-label attacks and using our certified yet practical defense as a strong baseline to evaluate these attacks.
△ Less
Submitted 18 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
DART: A Principled Approach to Adversarially Robust Unsupervised Domain Adaptation
Authors:
Yunjuan Wang,
Hussein Hazimeh,
Natalia Ponomareva,
Alexey Kurakin,
Ibrahim Hammoud,
Raman Arora
Abstract:
Distribution shifts and adversarial examples are two major challenges for deploying machine learning models. While these challenges have been studied individually, their combination is an important topic that remains relatively under-explored. In this work, we study the problem of adversarial robustness under a common setting of distribution shift - unsupervised domain adaptation (UDA). Specifical…
▽ More
Distribution shifts and adversarial examples are two major challenges for deploying machine learning models. While these challenges have been studied individually, their combination is an important topic that remains relatively under-explored. In this work, we study the problem of adversarial robustness under a common setting of distribution shift - unsupervised domain adaptation (UDA). Specifically, given a labeled source domain $D_S$ and an unlabeled target domain $D_T$ with related but different distributions, the goal is to obtain an adversarially robust model for $D_T$. The absence of target domain labels poses a unique challenge, as conventional adversarial robustness defenses cannot be directly applied to $D_T$. To address this challenge, we first establish a generalization bound for the adversarial target loss, which consists of (i) terms related to the loss on the data, and (ii) a measure of worst-case domain divergence. Motivated by this bound, we develop a novel unified defense framework called Divergence Aware adveRsarial Training (DART), which can be used in conjunction with a variety of standard UDA methods; e.g., DANN [Ganin and Lempitsky, 2015]. DART is applicable to general threat models, including the popular $\ell_p$-norm model, and does not require heuristic regularizers or architectural changes. We also release DomainRobust: a testbed for evaluating robustness of UDA models to adversarial attacks. DomainRobust consists of 4 multi-domain benchmark datasets (with 46 source-target pairs) and 7 meta-algorithms with a total of 11 variants. Our large-scale experiments demonstrate that on average, DART significantly enhances model robustness on all benchmarks compared to the state of the art, while maintaining competitive standard accuracy. The relative improvement in robustness from DART reaches up to 29.2% on the source-target domain pairs considered.
△ Less
Submitted 16 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Harnessing large-language models to generate private synthetic text
Authors:
Alexey Kurakin,
Natalia Ponomareva,
Umar Syed,
Liam MacDermed,
Andreas Terzis
Abstract:
Differentially private training algorithms like DP-SGD protect sensitive training data by ensuring that trained models do not reveal private information. An alternative approach, which this paper studies, is to use a sensitive dataset to generate synthetic data that is differentially private with respect to the original data, and then non-privately training a model on the synthetic data. Doing so…
▽ More
Differentially private training algorithms like DP-SGD protect sensitive training data by ensuring that trained models do not reveal private information. An alternative approach, which this paper studies, is to use a sensitive dataset to generate synthetic data that is differentially private with respect to the original data, and then non-privately training a model on the synthetic data. Doing so has several advantages: synthetic data can be reused for other tasks (including for hyper parameter tuning), retained indefinitely, and shared with third parties without sacrificing privacy. However, generating private synthetic data is much harder than training a private model. To improve performance on text data, recent work has utilized public data by starting with a pre-trained generative language model and privately fine-tuning it on sensitive data. This model can be used to sample a DP synthetic dataset. While this strategy seems straightforward, executing it has proven problematic. Previous approaches either show significant performance loss, or have, as we show, critical design flaws. In this paper we demonstrate that a proper training objective along with tuning fewer parameters results in excellent DP synthetic data quality. Our approach is competitive with direct DP-training of downstream classifiers in terms of performance on downstream tasks. Further, we demonstrate that our DP synthetic data is not only useful for downstream classifier training, but also to tune those same models.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2024; v1 submitted 2 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
Synthetic Query Generation for Privacy-Preserving Deep Retrieval Systems using Differentially Private Language Models
Authors:
Aldo Gael Carranza,
Rezsa Farahani,
Natalia Ponomareva,
Alex Kurakin,
Matthew Jagielski,
Milad Nasr
Abstract:
We address the challenge of ensuring differential privacy (DP) guarantees in training deep retrieval systems. Training these systems often involves the use of contrastive-style losses, which are typically non-per-example decomposable, making them difficult to directly DP-train with since common techniques require per-example gradients. To address this issue, we propose an approach that prioritizes…
▽ More
We address the challenge of ensuring differential privacy (DP) guarantees in training deep retrieval systems. Training these systems often involves the use of contrastive-style losses, which are typically non-per-example decomposable, making them difficult to directly DP-train with since common techniques require per-example gradients. To address this issue, we propose an approach that prioritizes ensuring query privacy prior to training a deep retrieval system. Our method employs DP language models (LMs) to generate private synthetic queries representative of the original data. These synthetic queries can be used in downstream retrieval system training without compromising privacy. Our approach demonstrates a significant enhancement in retrieval quality compared to direct DP-training, all while maintaining query-level privacy guarantees. This work highlights the potential of harnessing LMs to overcome limitations in standard DP-training methods.
△ Less
Submitted 23 May, 2024; v1 submitted 10 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
How to DP-fy ML: A Practical Guide to Machine Learning with Differential Privacy
Authors:
Natalia Ponomareva,
Hussein Hazimeh,
Alex Kurakin,
Zheng Xu,
Carson Denison,
H. Brendan McMahan,
Sergei Vassilvitskii,
Steve Chien,
Abhradeep Thakurta
Abstract:
ML models are ubiquitous in real world applications and are a constant focus of research. At the same time, the community has started to realize the importance of protecting the privacy of ML training data.
Differential Privacy (DP) has become a gold standard for making formal statements about data anonymization. However, while some adoption of DP has happened in industry, attempts to apply DP t…
▽ More
ML models are ubiquitous in real world applications and are a constant focus of research. At the same time, the community has started to realize the importance of protecting the privacy of ML training data.
Differential Privacy (DP) has become a gold standard for making formal statements about data anonymization. However, while some adoption of DP has happened in industry, attempts to apply DP to real world complex ML models are still few and far between. The adoption of DP is hindered by limited practical guidance of what DP protection entails, what privacy guarantees to aim for, and the difficulty of achieving good privacy-utility-computation trade-offs for ML models. Tricks for tuning and maximizing performance are scattered among papers or stored in the heads of practitioners. Furthermore, the literature seems to present conflicting evidence on how and whether to apply architectural adjustments and which components are "safe" to use with DP.
This work is a self-contained guide that gives an in-depth overview of the field of DP ML and presents information about achieving the best possible DP ML model with rigorous privacy guarantees. Our target audience is both researchers and practitioners. Researchers interested in DP for ML will benefit from a clear overview of current advances and areas for improvement. We include theory-focused sections that highlight important topics such as privacy accounting and its assumptions, and convergence. For a practitioner, we provide a background in DP theory and a clear step-by-step guide for choosing an appropriate privacy definition and approach, implementing DP training, potentially updating the model architecture, and tuning hyperparameters. For both researchers and practitioners, consistently and fully reporting privacy guarantees is critical, and so we propose a set of specific best practices for stating guarantees.
△ Less
Submitted 31 July, 2023; v1 submitted 1 March, 2023;
originally announced March 2023.
-
RETVec: Resilient and Efficient Text Vectorizer
Authors:
Elie Bursztein,
Marina Zhang,
Owen Vallis,
Xinyu Jia,
Alexey Kurakin
Abstract:
This paper describes RETVec, an efficient, resilient, and multilingual text vectorizer designed for neural-based text processing. RETVec combines a novel character encoding with an optional small embedding model to embed words into a 256-dimensional vector space. The RETVec embedding model is pre-trained using pair-wise metric learning to be robust against typos and character-level adversarial att…
▽ More
This paper describes RETVec, an efficient, resilient, and multilingual text vectorizer designed for neural-based text processing. RETVec combines a novel character encoding with an optional small embedding model to embed words into a 256-dimensional vector space. The RETVec embedding model is pre-trained using pair-wise metric learning to be robust against typos and character-level adversarial attacks. In this paper, we evaluate and compare RETVec to state-of-the-art vectorizers and word embeddings on popular model architectures and datasets. These comparisons demonstrate that RETVec leads to competitive, multilingual models that are significantly more resilient to typos and adversarial text attacks. RETVec is available under the Apache 2 license at https://github.com/google-research/retvec.
△ Less
Submitted 22 April, 2024; v1 submitted 17 February, 2023;
originally announced February 2023.
-
Publishing Efficient On-device Models Increases Adversarial Vulnerability
Authors:
Sanghyun Hong,
Nicholas Carlini,
Alexey Kurakin
Abstract:
Recent increases in the computational demands of deep neural networks (DNNs) have sparked interest in efficient deep learning mechanisms, e.g., quantization or pruning. These mechanisms enable the construction of a small, efficient version of commercial-scale models with comparable accuracy, accelerating their deployment to resource-constrained devices.
In this paper, we study the security consi…
▽ More
Recent increases in the computational demands of deep neural networks (DNNs) have sparked interest in efficient deep learning mechanisms, e.g., quantization or pruning. These mechanisms enable the construction of a small, efficient version of commercial-scale models with comparable accuracy, accelerating their deployment to resource-constrained devices.
In this paper, we study the security considerations of publishing on-device variants of large-scale models. We first show that an adversary can exploit on-device models to make attacking the large models easier. In evaluations across 19 DNNs, by exploiting the published on-device models as a transfer prior, the adversarial vulnerability of the original commercial-scale models increases by up to 100x. We then show that the vulnerability increases as the similarity between a full-scale and its efficient model increase. Based on the insights, we propose a defense, $similarity$-$unpairing$, that fine-tunes on-device models with the objective of reducing the similarity. We evaluated our defense on all the 19 DNNs and found that it reduces the transferability up to 90% and the number of queries required by a factor of 10-100x. Our results suggest that further research is needed on the security (or even privacy) threats caused by publishing those efficient siblings.
△ Less
Submitted 28 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
-
Differentially Private Image Classification from Features
Authors:
Harsh Mehta,
Walid Krichene,
Abhradeep Thakurta,
Alexey Kurakin,
Ashok Cutkosky
Abstract:
Leveraging transfer learning has recently been shown to be an effective strategy for training large models with Differential Privacy (DP). Moreover, somewhat surprisingly, recent works have found that privately training just the last layer of a pre-trained model provides the best utility with DP. While past studies largely rely on algorithms like DP-SGD for training large models, in the specific c…
▽ More
Leveraging transfer learning has recently been shown to be an effective strategy for training large models with Differential Privacy (DP). Moreover, somewhat surprisingly, recent works have found that privately training just the last layer of a pre-trained model provides the best utility with DP. While past studies largely rely on algorithms like DP-SGD for training large models, in the specific case of privately learning from features, we observe that computational burden is low enough to allow for more sophisticated optimization schemes, including second-order methods. To that end, we systematically explore the effect of design parameters such as loss function and optimization algorithm. We find that, while commonly used logistic regression performs better than linear regression in the non-private setting, the situation is reversed in the private setting. We find that linear regression is much more effective than logistic regression from both privacy and computational aspects, especially at stricter epsilon values ($ε< 1$). On the optimization side, we also explore using Newton's method, and find that second-order information is quite helpful even with privacy, although the benefit significantly diminishes with stricter privacy guarantees. While both methods use second-order information, least squares is effective at lower epsilons while Newton's method is effective at larger epsilon values. To combine the benefits of both, we propose a novel algorithm called DP-FC, which leverages feature covariance instead of the Hessian of the logistic regression loss and performs well across all $ε$ values we tried. With this, we obtain new SOTA results on ImageNet-1k, CIFAR-100 and CIFAR-10 across all values of $ε$ typically considered. Most remarkably, on ImageNet-1K, we obtain top-1 accuracy of 88\% under (8, $8 * 10^{-7}$)-DP and 84.3\% under (0.1, $8 * 10^{-7}$)-DP.
△ Less
Submitted 23 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
-
Large Scale Transfer Learning for Differentially Private Image Classification
Authors:
Harsh Mehta,
Abhradeep Thakurta,
Alexey Kurakin,
Ashok Cutkosky
Abstract:
Differential Privacy (DP) provides a formal framework for training machine learning models with individual example level privacy. In the field of deep learning, Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) has emerged as a popular private training algorithm. Unfortunately, the computational cost of training large-scale models with DP-SGD is substantially higher than non-private trai…
▽ More
Differential Privacy (DP) provides a formal framework for training machine learning models with individual example level privacy. In the field of deep learning, Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) has emerged as a popular private training algorithm. Unfortunately, the computational cost of training large-scale models with DP-SGD is substantially higher than non-private training. This is further exacerbated by the fact that increasing the number of parameters leads to larger degradation in utility with DP. In this work, we zoom in on the ImageNet dataset and demonstrate that, similar to the non-private case, pre-training over-parameterized models on a large public dataset can lead to substantial gains when the model is finetuned privately. Moreover, by systematically comparing private and non-private models across a range of large batch sizes, we find that similar to non-private setting, choice of optimizer can further improve performance substantially with DP. By using LAMB optimizer with DP-SGD we saw improvement of up to 20$\%$ points (absolute). Finally, we show that finetuning just the last layer for a \emph{single step} in the full batch setting, combined with extremely small-scale (near-zero) initialization leads to both SOTA results of 81.7 $\%$ under a wide privacy budget range of $ε\in [4, 10]$ and $δ$ = $10^{-6}$ while minimizing the computational overhead substantially.
△ Less
Submitted 20 May, 2022; v1 submitted 5 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
Toward Training at ImageNet Scale with Differential Privacy
Authors:
Alexey Kurakin,
Shuang Song,
Steve Chien,
Roxana Geambasu,
Andreas Terzis,
Abhradeep Thakurta
Abstract:
Differential privacy (DP) is the de facto standard for training machine learning (ML) models, including neural networks, while ensuring the privacy of individual examples in the training set. Despite a rich literature on how to train ML models with differential privacy, it remains extremely challenging to train real-life, large neural networks with both reasonable accuracy and privacy.
We set ou…
▽ More
Differential privacy (DP) is the de facto standard for training machine learning (ML) models, including neural networks, while ensuring the privacy of individual examples in the training set. Despite a rich literature on how to train ML models with differential privacy, it remains extremely challenging to train real-life, large neural networks with both reasonable accuracy and privacy.
We set out to investigate how to do this, using ImageNet image classification as a poster example of an ML task that is very challenging to resolve accurately with DP right now. This paper shares initial lessons from our effort, in the hope that it will inspire and inform other researchers to explore DP training at scale. We show approaches that help make DP training faster, as well as model types and settings of the training process that tend to work better in the DP setting. Combined, the methods we discuss let us train a Resnet-18 with DP to $47.9\%$ accuracy and privacy parameters $ε= 10, δ= 10^{-6}$. This is a significant improvement over "naive" DP training of ImageNet models, but a far cry from the $75\%$ accuracy that can be obtained by the same network without privacy. The model we use was pretrained on the Places365 data set as a starting point. We share our code at https://github.com/google-research/dp-imagenet, calling for others to build upon this new baseline to further improve DP at scale.
△ Less
Submitted 8 February, 2022; v1 submitted 28 January, 2022;
originally announced January 2022.
-
AdaMatch: A Unified Approach to Semi-Supervised Learning and Domain Adaptation
Authors:
David Berthelot,
Rebecca Roelofs,
Kihyuk Sohn,
Nicholas Carlini,
Alex Kurakin
Abstract:
We extend semi-supervised learning to the problem of domain adaptation to learn significantly higher-accuracy models that train on one data distribution and test on a different one. With the goal of generality, we introduce AdaMatch, a method that unifies the tasks of unsupervised domain adaptation (UDA), semi-supervised learning (SSL), and semi-supervised domain adaptation (SSDA). In an extensive…
▽ More
We extend semi-supervised learning to the problem of domain adaptation to learn significantly higher-accuracy models that train on one data distribution and test on a different one. With the goal of generality, we introduce AdaMatch, a method that unifies the tasks of unsupervised domain adaptation (UDA), semi-supervised learning (SSL), and semi-supervised domain adaptation (SSDA). In an extensive experimental study, we compare its behavior with respective state-of-the-art techniques from SSL, SSDA, and UDA on vision classification tasks. We find AdaMatch either matches or significantly exceeds the state-of-the-art in each case using the same hyper-parameters regardless of the dataset or task. For example, AdaMatch nearly doubles the accuracy compared to that of the prior state-of-the-art on the UDA task for DomainNet and even exceeds the accuracy of the prior state-of-the-art obtained with pre-training by 6.4% when AdaMatch is trained completely from scratch. Furthermore, by providing AdaMatch with just one labeled example per class from the target domain (i.e., the SSDA setting), we increase the target accuracy by an additional 6.1%, and with 5 labeled examples, by 13.6%.
△ Less
Submitted 15 March, 2022; v1 submitted 8 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
Handcrafted Backdoors in Deep Neural Networks
Authors:
Sanghyun Hong,
Nicholas Carlini,
Alexey Kurakin
Abstract:
When machine learning training is outsourced to third parties, $backdoor$ $attacks$ become practical as the third party who trains the model may act maliciously to inject hidden behaviors into the otherwise accurate model. Until now, the mechanism to inject backdoors has been limited to $poisoning$. We argue that a supply-chain attacker has more attack techniques available by introducing a…
▽ More
When machine learning training is outsourced to third parties, $backdoor$ $attacks$ become practical as the third party who trains the model may act maliciously to inject hidden behaviors into the otherwise accurate model. Until now, the mechanism to inject backdoors has been limited to $poisoning$. We argue that a supply-chain attacker has more attack techniques available by introducing a $handcrafted$ attack that directly manipulates a model's weights. This direct modification gives our attacker more degrees of freedom compared to poisoning, and we show it can be used to evade many backdoor detection or removal defenses effectively. Across four datasets and four network architectures our backdoor attacks maintain an attack success rate above 96%. Our results suggest that further research is needed for understanding the complete space of supply-chain backdoor attacks.
△ Less
Submitted 15 November, 2022; v1 submitted 8 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
Enabling certification of verification-agnostic networks via memory-efficient semidefinite programming
Authors:
Sumanth Dathathri,
Krishnamurthy Dvijotham,
Alexey Kurakin,
Aditi Raghunathan,
Jonathan Uesato,
Rudy Bunel,
Shreya Shankar,
Jacob Steinhardt,
Ian Goodfellow,
Percy Liang,
Pushmeet Kohli
Abstract:
Convex relaxations have emerged as a promising approach for verifying desirable properties of neural networks like robustness to adversarial perturbations. Widely used Linear Programming (LP) relaxations only work well when networks are trained to facilitate verification. This precludes applications that involve verification-agnostic networks, i.e., networks not specially trained for verification.…
▽ More
Convex relaxations have emerged as a promising approach for verifying desirable properties of neural networks like robustness to adversarial perturbations. Widely used Linear Programming (LP) relaxations only work well when networks are trained to facilitate verification. This precludes applications that involve verification-agnostic networks, i.e., networks not specially trained for verification. On the other hand, semidefinite programming (SDP) relaxations have successfully be applied to verification-agnostic networks, but do not currently scale beyond small networks due to poor time and space asymptotics. In this work, we propose a first-order dual SDP algorithm that (1) requires memory only linear in the total number of network activations, (2) only requires a fixed number of forward/backward passes through the network per iteration. By exploiting iterative eigenvector methods, we express all solver operations in terms of forward and backward passes through the network, enabling efficient use of hardware like GPUs/TPUs. For two verification-agnostic networks on MNIST and CIFAR-10, we significantly improve L-inf verified robust accuracy from 1% to 88% and 6% to 40% respectively. We also demonstrate tight verification of a quadratic stability specification for the decoder of a variational autoencoder.
△ Less
Submitted 3 November, 2020; v1 submitted 22 October, 2020;
originally announced October 2020.
-
FixMatch: Simplifying Semi-Supervised Learning with Consistency and Confidence
Authors:
Kihyuk Sohn,
David Berthelot,
Chun-Liang Li,
Zizhao Zhang,
Nicholas Carlini,
Ekin D. Cubuk,
Alex Kurakin,
Han Zhang,
Colin Raffel
Abstract:
Semi-supervised learning (SSL) provides an effective means of leveraging unlabeled data to improve a model's performance. In this paper, we demonstrate the power of a simple combination of two common SSL methods: consistency regularization and pseudo-labeling. Our algorithm, FixMatch, first generates pseudo-labels using the model's predictions on weakly-augmented unlabeled images. For a given imag…
▽ More
Semi-supervised learning (SSL) provides an effective means of leveraging unlabeled data to improve a model's performance. In this paper, we demonstrate the power of a simple combination of two common SSL methods: consistency regularization and pseudo-labeling. Our algorithm, FixMatch, first generates pseudo-labels using the model's predictions on weakly-augmented unlabeled images. For a given image, the pseudo-label is only retained if the model produces a high-confidence prediction. The model is then trained to predict the pseudo-label when fed a strongly-augmented version of the same image. Despite its simplicity, we show that FixMatch achieves state-of-the-art performance across a variety of standard semi-supervised learning benchmarks, including 94.93% accuracy on CIFAR-10 with 250 labels and 88.61% accuracy with 40 -- just 4 labels per class. Since FixMatch bears many similarities to existing SSL methods that achieve worse performance, we carry out an extensive ablation study to tease apart the experimental factors that are most important to FixMatch's success. We make our code available at https://github.com/google-research/fixmatch.
△ Less
Submitted 25 November, 2020; v1 submitted 21 January, 2020;
originally announced January 2020.
-
ReMixMatch: Semi-Supervised Learning with Distribution Alignment and Augmentation Anchoring
Authors:
David Berthelot,
Nicholas Carlini,
Ekin D. Cubuk,
Alex Kurakin,
Kihyuk Sohn,
Han Zhang,
Colin Raffel
Abstract:
We improve the recently-proposed "MixMatch" semi-supervised learning algorithm by introducing two new techniques: distribution alignment and augmentation anchoring. Distribution alignment encourages the marginal distribution of predictions on unlabeled data to be close to the marginal distribution of ground-truth labels. Augmentation anchoring feeds multiple strongly augmented versions of an input…
▽ More
We improve the recently-proposed "MixMatch" semi-supervised learning algorithm by introducing two new techniques: distribution alignment and augmentation anchoring. Distribution alignment encourages the marginal distribution of predictions on unlabeled data to be close to the marginal distribution of ground-truth labels. Augmentation anchoring feeds multiple strongly augmented versions of an input into the model and encourages each output to be close to the prediction for a weakly-augmented version of the same input. To produce strong augmentations, we propose a variant of AutoAugment which learns the augmentation policy while the model is being trained. Our new algorithm, dubbed ReMixMatch, is significantly more data-efficient than prior work, requiring between $5\times$ and $16\times$ less data to reach the same accuracy. For example, on CIFAR-10 with 250 labeled examples we reach $93.73\%$ accuracy (compared to MixMatch's accuracy of $93.58\%$ with $4{,}000$ examples) and a median accuracy of $84.92\%$ with just four labels per class. We make our code and data open-source at https://github.com/google-research/remixmatch.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2020; v1 submitted 21 November, 2019;
originally announced November 2019.
-
High Accuracy and High Fidelity Extraction of Neural Networks
Authors:
Matthew Jagielski,
Nicholas Carlini,
David Berthelot,
Alex Kurakin,
Nicolas Papernot
Abstract:
In a model extraction attack, an adversary steals a copy of a remotely deployed machine learning model, given oracle prediction access. We taxonomize model extraction attacks around two objectives: *accuracy*, i.e., performing well on the underlying learning task, and *fidelity*, i.e., matching the predictions of the remote victim classifier on any input.
To extract a high-accuracy model, we dev…
▽ More
In a model extraction attack, an adversary steals a copy of a remotely deployed machine learning model, given oracle prediction access. We taxonomize model extraction attacks around two objectives: *accuracy*, i.e., performing well on the underlying learning task, and *fidelity*, i.e., matching the predictions of the remote victim classifier on any input.
To extract a high-accuracy model, we develop a learning-based attack exploiting the victim to supervise the training of an extracted model. Through analytical and empirical arguments, we then explain the inherent limitations that prevent any learning-based strategy from extracting a truly high-fidelity model---i.e., extracting a functionally-equivalent model whose predictions are identical to those of the victim model on all possible inputs. Addressing these limitations, we expand on prior work to develop the first practical functionally-equivalent extraction attack for direct extraction (i.e., without training) of a model's weights.
We perform experiments both on academic datasets and a state-of-the-art image classifier trained with 1 billion proprietary images. In addition to broadening the scope of model extraction research, our work demonstrates the practicality of model extraction attacks against production-grade systems.
△ Less
Submitted 3 March, 2020; v1 submitted 3 September, 2019;
originally announced September 2019.
-
On Evaluating Adversarial Robustness
Authors:
Nicholas Carlini,
Anish Athalye,
Nicolas Papernot,
Wieland Brendel,
Jonas Rauber,
Dimitris Tsipras,
Ian Goodfellow,
Aleksander Madry,
Alexey Kurakin
Abstract:
Correctly evaluating defenses against adversarial examples has proven to be extremely difficult. Despite the significant amount of recent work attempting to design defenses that withstand adaptive attacks, few have succeeded; most papers that propose defenses are quickly shown to be incorrect.
We believe a large contributing factor is the difficulty of performing security evaluations. In this pa…
▽ More
Correctly evaluating defenses against adversarial examples has proven to be extremely difficult. Despite the significant amount of recent work attempting to design defenses that withstand adaptive attacks, few have succeeded; most papers that propose defenses are quickly shown to be incorrect.
We believe a large contributing factor is the difficulty of performing security evaluations. In this paper, we discuss the methodological foundations, review commonly accepted best practices, and suggest new methods for evaluating defenses to adversarial examples. We hope that both researchers developing defenses as well as readers and reviewers who wish to understand the completeness of an evaluation consider our advice in order to avoid common pitfalls.
△ Less
Submitted 20 February, 2019; v1 submitted 18 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
-
Adversarial Vision Challenge
Authors:
Wieland Brendel,
Jonas Rauber,
Alexey Kurakin,
Nicolas Papernot,
Behar Veliqi,
Marcel Salathé,
Sharada P. Mohanty,
Matthias Bethge
Abstract:
The NIPS 2018 Adversarial Vision Challenge is a competition to facilitate measurable progress towards robust machine vision models and more generally applicable adversarial attacks. This document is an updated version of our competition proposal that was accepted in the competition track of 32nd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2018).
The NIPS 2018 Adversarial Vision Challenge is a competition to facilitate measurable progress towards robust machine vision models and more generally applicable adversarial attacks. This document is an updated version of our competition proposal that was accepted in the competition track of 32nd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2018).
△ Less
Submitted 6 December, 2018; v1 submitted 6 August, 2018;
originally announced August 2018.
-
Adversarial Attacks and Defences Competition
Authors:
Alexey Kurakin,
Ian Goodfellow,
Samy Bengio,
Yinpeng Dong,
Fangzhou Liao,
Ming Liang,
Tianyu Pang,
Jun Zhu,
Xiaolin Hu,
Cihang Xie,
Jianyu Wang,
Zhishuai Zhang,
Zhou Ren,
Alan Yuille,
Sangxia Huang,
Yao Zhao,
Yuzhe Zhao,
Zhonglin Han,
Junjiajia Long,
Yerkebulan Berdibekov,
Takuya Akiba,
Seiya Tokui,
Motoki Abe
Abstract:
To accelerate research on adversarial examples and robustness of machine learning classifiers, Google Brain organized a NIPS 2017 competition that encouraged researchers to develop new methods to generate adversarial examples as well as to develop new ways to defend against them. In this chapter, we describe the structure and organization of the competition and the solutions developed by several o…
▽ More
To accelerate research on adversarial examples and robustness of machine learning classifiers, Google Brain organized a NIPS 2017 competition that encouraged researchers to develop new methods to generate adversarial examples as well as to develop new ways to defend against them. In this chapter, we describe the structure and organization of the competition and the solutions developed by several of the top-placing teams.
△ Less
Submitted 30 March, 2018;
originally announced April 2018.
-
Adversarial Logit Pairing
Authors:
Harini Kannan,
Alexey Kurakin,
Ian Goodfellow
Abstract:
In this paper, we develop improved techniques for defending against adversarial examples at scale. First, we implement the state of the art version of adversarial training at unprecedented scale on ImageNet and investigate whether it remains effective in this setting - an important open scientific question (Athalye et al., 2018). Next, we introduce enhanced defenses using a technique we call logit…
▽ More
In this paper, we develop improved techniques for defending against adversarial examples at scale. First, we implement the state of the art version of adversarial training at unprecedented scale on ImageNet and investigate whether it remains effective in this setting - an important open scientific question (Athalye et al., 2018). Next, we introduce enhanced defenses using a technique we call logit pairing, a method that encourages logits for pairs of examples to be similar. When applied to clean examples and their adversarial counterparts, logit pairing improves accuracy on adversarial examples over vanilla adversarial training; we also find that logit pairing on clean examples only is competitive with adversarial training in terms of accuracy on two datasets. Finally, we show that adversarial logit pairing achieves the state of the art defense on ImageNet against PGD white box attacks, with an accuracy improvement from 1.5% to 27.9%. Adversarial logit pairing also successfully damages the current state of the art defense against black box attacks on ImageNet (Tramer et al., 2018), dropping its accuracy from 66.6% to 47.1%. With this new accuracy drop, adversarial logit pairing ties with Tramer et al.(2018) for the state of the art on black box attacks on ImageNet.
△ Less
Submitted 16 March, 2018;
originally announced March 2018.
-
Adversarial Examples that Fool both Computer Vision and Time-Limited Humans
Authors:
Gamaleldin F. Elsayed,
Shreya Shankar,
Brian Cheung,
Nicolas Papernot,
Alex Kurakin,
Ian Goodfellow,
Jascha Sohl-Dickstein
Abstract:
Machine learning models are vulnerable to adversarial examples: small changes to images can cause computer vision models to make mistakes such as identifying a school bus as an ostrich. However, it is still an open question whether humans are prone to similar mistakes. Here, we address this question by leveraging recent techniques that transfer adversarial examples from computer vision models with…
▽ More
Machine learning models are vulnerable to adversarial examples: small changes to images can cause computer vision models to make mistakes such as identifying a school bus as an ostrich. However, it is still an open question whether humans are prone to similar mistakes. Here, we address this question by leveraging recent techniques that transfer adversarial examples from computer vision models with known parameters and architecture to other models with unknown parameters and architecture, and by matching the initial processing of the human visual system. We find that adversarial examples that strongly transfer across computer vision models influence the classifications made by time-limited human observers.
△ Less
Submitted 21 May, 2018; v1 submitted 22 February, 2018;
originally announced February 2018.
-
Ensemble Adversarial Training: Attacks and Defenses
Authors:
Florian Tramèr,
Alexey Kurakin,
Nicolas Papernot,
Ian Goodfellow,
Dan Boneh,
Patrick McDaniel
Abstract:
Adversarial examples are perturbed inputs designed to fool machine learning models. Adversarial training injects such examples into training data to increase robustness. To scale this technique to large datasets, perturbations are crafted using fast single-step methods that maximize a linear approximation of the model's loss. We show that this form of adversarial training converges to a degenerate…
▽ More
Adversarial examples are perturbed inputs designed to fool machine learning models. Adversarial training injects such examples into training data to increase robustness. To scale this technique to large datasets, perturbations are crafted using fast single-step methods that maximize a linear approximation of the model's loss. We show that this form of adversarial training converges to a degenerate global minimum, wherein small curvature artifacts near the data points obfuscate a linear approximation of the loss. The model thus learns to generate weak perturbations, rather than defend against strong ones. As a result, we find that adversarial training remains vulnerable to black-box attacks, where we transfer perturbations computed on undefended models, as well as to a powerful novel single-step attack that escapes the non-smooth vicinity of the input data via a small random step. We further introduce Ensemble Adversarial Training, a technique that augments training data with perturbations transferred from other models. On ImageNet, Ensemble Adversarial Training yields models with strong robustness to black-box attacks. In particular, our most robust model won the first round of the NIPS 2017 competition on Defenses against Adversarial Attacks. However, subsequent work found that more elaborate black-box attacks could significantly enhance transferability and reduce the accuracy of our models.
△ Less
Submitted 26 April, 2020; v1 submitted 19 May, 2017;
originally announced May 2017.
-
Large-Scale Evolution of Image Classifiers
Authors:
Esteban Real,
Sherry Moore,
Andrew Selle,
Saurabh Saxena,
Yutaka Leon Suematsu,
Jie Tan,
Quoc Le,
Alex Kurakin
Abstract:
Neural networks have proven effective at solving difficult problems but designing their architectures can be challenging, even for image classification problems alone. Our goal is to minimize human participation, so we employ evolutionary algorithms to discover such networks automatically. Despite significant computational requirements, we show that it is now possible to evolve models with accurac…
▽ More
Neural networks have proven effective at solving difficult problems but designing their architectures can be challenging, even for image classification problems alone. Our goal is to minimize human participation, so we employ evolutionary algorithms to discover such networks automatically. Despite significant computational requirements, we show that it is now possible to evolve models with accuracies within the range of those published in the last year. Specifically, we employ simple evolutionary techniques at unprecedented scales to discover models for the CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 datasets, starting from trivial initial conditions and reaching accuracies of 94.6% (95.6% for ensemble) and 77.0%, respectively. To do this, we use novel and intuitive mutation operators that navigate large search spaces; we stress that no human participation is required once evolution starts and that the output is a fully-trained model. Throughout this work, we place special emphasis on the repeatability of results, the variability in the outcomes and the computational requirements.
△ Less
Submitted 11 June, 2017; v1 submitted 3 March, 2017;
originally announced March 2017.
-
Adversarial Machine Learning at Scale
Authors:
Alexey Kurakin,
Ian Goodfellow,
Samy Bengio
Abstract:
Adversarial examples are malicious inputs designed to fool machine learning models. They often transfer from one model to another, allowing attackers to mount black box attacks without knowledge of the target model's parameters. Adversarial training is the process of explicitly training a model on adversarial examples, in order to make it more robust to attack or to reduce its test error on clean…
▽ More
Adversarial examples are malicious inputs designed to fool machine learning models. They often transfer from one model to another, allowing attackers to mount black box attacks without knowledge of the target model's parameters. Adversarial training is the process of explicitly training a model on adversarial examples, in order to make it more robust to attack or to reduce its test error on clean inputs. So far, adversarial training has primarily been applied to small problems. In this research, we apply adversarial training to ImageNet. Our contributions include: (1) recommendations for how to succesfully scale adversarial training to large models and datasets, (2) the observation that adversarial training confers robustness to single-step attack methods, (3) the finding that multi-step attack methods are somewhat less transferable than single-step attack methods, so single-step attacks are the best for mounting black-box attacks, and (4) resolution of a "label leaking" effect that causes adversarially trained models to perform better on adversarial examples than on clean examples, because the adversarial example construction process uses the true label and the model can learn to exploit regularities in the construction process.
△ Less
Submitted 10 February, 2017; v1 submitted 3 November, 2016;
originally announced November 2016.
-
Technical Report on the CleverHans v2.1.0 Adversarial Examples Library
Authors:
Nicolas Papernot,
Fartash Faghri,
Nicholas Carlini,
Ian Goodfellow,
Reuben Feinman,
Alexey Kurakin,
Cihang Xie,
Yash Sharma,
Tom Brown,
Aurko Roy,
Alexander Matyasko,
Vahid Behzadan,
Karen Hambardzumyan,
Zhishuai Zhang,
Yi-Lin Juang,
Zhi Li,
Ryan Sheatsley,
Abhibhav Garg,
Jonathan Uesato,
Willi Gierke,
Yinpeng Dong,
David Berthelot,
Paul Hendricks,
Jonas Rauber,
Rujun Long
, et al. (1 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
CleverHans is a software library that provides standardized reference implementations of adversarial example construction techniques and adversarial training. The library may be used to develop more robust machine learning models and to provide standardized benchmarks of models' performance in the adversarial setting. Benchmarks constructed without a standardized implementation of adversarial exam…
▽ More
CleverHans is a software library that provides standardized reference implementations of adversarial example construction techniques and adversarial training. The library may be used to develop more robust machine learning models and to provide standardized benchmarks of models' performance in the adversarial setting. Benchmarks constructed without a standardized implementation of adversarial example construction are not comparable to each other, because a good result may indicate a robust model or it may merely indicate a weak implementation of the adversarial example construction procedure.
This technical report is structured as follows. Section 1 provides an overview of adversarial examples in machine learning and of the CleverHans software. Section 2 presents the core functionalities of the library: namely the attacks based on adversarial examples and defenses to improve the robustness of machine learning models to these attacks. Section 3 describes how to report benchmark results using the library. Section 4 describes the versioning system.
△ Less
Submitted 27 June, 2018; v1 submitted 3 October, 2016;
originally announced October 2016.
-
Adversarial examples in the physical world
Authors:
Alexey Kurakin,
Ian Goodfellow,
Samy Bengio
Abstract:
Most existing machine learning classifiers are highly vulnerable to adversarial examples. An adversarial example is a sample of input data which has been modified very slightly in a way that is intended to cause a machine learning classifier to misclassify it. In many cases, these modifications can be so subtle that a human observer does not even notice the modification at all, yet the classifier…
▽ More
Most existing machine learning classifiers are highly vulnerable to adversarial examples. An adversarial example is a sample of input data which has been modified very slightly in a way that is intended to cause a machine learning classifier to misclassify it. In many cases, these modifications can be so subtle that a human observer does not even notice the modification at all, yet the classifier still makes a mistake. Adversarial examples pose security concerns because they could be used to perform an attack on machine learning systems, even if the adversary has no access to the underlying model. Up to now, all previous work have assumed a threat model in which the adversary can feed data directly into the machine learning classifier. This is not always the case for systems operating in the physical world, for example those which are using signals from cameras and other sensors as an input. This paper shows that even in such physical world scenarios, machine learning systems are vulnerable to adversarial examples. We demonstrate this by feeding adversarial images obtained from cell-phone camera to an ImageNet Inception classifier and measuring the classification accuracy of the system. We find that a large fraction of adversarial examples are classified incorrectly even when perceived through the camera.
△ Less
Submitted 10 February, 2017; v1 submitted 8 July, 2016;
originally announced July 2016.
