On Inferring Training Data Attributes in Machine Learning Models

A number of recent works have demonstrated that API access to machine learning models leaks information about the dataset records used to train the models. Further, the work of \cite{somesh-overfit} shows that such membership inference attacks (MIAs) may be sufficient to construct a stronger breed of attribute inference attacks (AIAs), which given a partial view of a record can guess the missing attributes. In this work, we show (to the contrary) that MIA may not be sufficient to build a successful AIA. This is because the latter requires the ability to distinguish between similar records (differing only in a few attributes), and, as we demonstrate, the current breed of MIA are unsuccessful in distinguishing member records from similar non-member records. We thus propose a relaxed notion of AIA, whose goal is to only approximately guess the missing attributes and argue that such an attack is more likely to be successful, if MIA is to be used as a subroutine for inferring training record attributes.Comment: Accepted by PPML'19, a CCS workshop. Submission of 4-pages bar references, and appendix V2: Update in dataset splitting, and comments on related work

Modelling and Quantifying Membership Information Leakage in Machine Learning

Machine learning models have been shown to be vulnerable to membership inference attacks, i.e., inferring whether individuals' data have been used for training models. The lack of understanding about factors contributing success of these attacks motivates the need for modelling membership information leakage using information theory and for investigating properties of machine learning models and training algorithms that can reduce membership information leakage. We use conditional mutual information leakage to measure the amount of information leakage from the trained machine learning model about the presence of an individual in the training dataset. We devise an upper bound for this measure of information leakage using Kullback--Leibler divergence that is more amenable to numerical computation. We prove a direct relationship between the Kullback--Leibler membership information leakage and the probability of success for a hypothesis-testing adversary examining whether a particular data record belongs to the training dataset of a machine learning model. We show that the mutual information leakage is a decreasing function of the training dataset size and the regularization weight. We also prove that, if the sensitivity of the machine learning model (defined in terms of the derivatives of the fitness with respect to model parameters) is high, more membership information is potentially leaked. This illustrates that complex models, such as deep neural networks, are more susceptible to membership inference attacks in comparison to simpler models with fewer degrees of freedom. We show that the amount of the membership information leakage is reduced by $\mathcal{O}(\log^{1/2}(\delta^{-1})\epsilon^{-1})$ when using Gaussian $(\epsilon,\delta)$-differentially-private additive noises

Membership Inference Attack on Graph Neural Networks

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), which generalize traditional deep neural networks on graph data, have achieved state-of-the-art performance on several graph analytical tasks. We focus on how trained GNN models could leak information about the \emph{member} nodes that they were trained on. We introduce two realistic settings for performing a membership inference (MI) attack on GNNs. While choosing the simplest possible attack model that utilizes the posteriors of the trained model (black-box access), we thoroughly analyze the properties of GNNs and the datasets which dictate the differences in their robustness towards MI attack. While in traditional machine learning models, overfitting is considered the main cause of such leakage, we show that in GNNs the additional structural information is the major contributing factor. We support our findings by extensive experiments on four representative GNN models. To prevent MI attacks on GNN, we propose two effective defenses that significantly decreases the attacker's inference by up to 60% without degradation to the target model's performance. Our code is available at https://github.com/iyempissy/rebMIGraph.Comment: Best student paper award, IEEE TPS 2

Data and Model Dependencies of Membership Inference Attack

Machine learning (ML) models have been shown to be vulnerable to Membership Inference Attacks (MIA), which infer the membership of a given data point in the target dataset by observing the prediction output of the ML model. While the key factors for the success of MIA have not yet been fully understood, existing defense mechanisms such as using L2 regularization \cite{10shokri2017membership} and dropout layers \cite{salem2018ml} take only the model's overfitting property into consideration. In this paper, we provide an empirical analysis of the impact of both the data and ML model properties on the vulnerability of ML techniques to MIA. Our results reveal the relationship between MIA accuracy and properties of the dataset and training model in use. In particular, we show that the size of shadow dataset, the class and feature balance and the entropy of the target dataset, the configurations and fairness of the training model are the most influential factors. Based on those experimental findings, we conclude that along with model overfitting, multiple properties jointly contribute to MIA success instead of any single property. Building on our experimental findings, we propose using those data and model properties as regularizers to protect ML models against MIA. Our results show that the proposed defense mechanisms can reduce the MIA accuracy by up to 25\% without sacrificing the ML model prediction utility

On the (In)Feasibility of Attribute Inference Attacks on Machine Learning Models

With an increase in low-cost machine learning APIs, advanced machine learning models may be trained on private datasets and monetized by providing them as a service. However, privacy researchers have demonstrated that these models may leak information about records in the training dataset via membership inference attacks. In this paper, we take a closer look at another inference attack reported in literature, called attribute inference, whereby an attacker tries to infer missing attributes of a partially known record used in the training dataset by accessing the machine learning model as an API. We show that even if a classification model succumbs to membership inference attacks, it is unlikely to be susceptible to attribute inference attacks. We demonstrate that this is because membership inference attacks fail to distinguish a member from a nearby non-member. We call the ability of an attacker to distinguish the two (similar) vectors as strong membership inference. We show that membership inference attacks cannot infer membership in this strong setting, and hence inferring attributes is infeasible. However, under a relaxed notion of attribute inference, called approximate attribute inference, we show that it is possible to infer attributes close to the true attributes. We verify our results on three publicly available datasets, five membership, and three attribute inference attacks reported in literature.Comment: 20 pages, accepted at IEEE EuroS&P 202