10.7CRJan 4, 2021
Learning Differentially Private MechanismsSubhajit Roy, Justin Hsu, Aws Albarghouthi
Differential privacy is a formal, mathematical definition of data privacy that has gained traction in academia, industry, and government. The task of correctly constructing differentially private algorithms is non-trivial, and mistakes have been made in foundational algorithms. Currently, there is no automated support for converting an existing, non-private program into a differentially private version. In this paper, we propose a technique for automatically learning an accurate and differentially private version of a given non-private program. We show how to solve this difficult program synthesis problem via a combination of techniques: carefully picking representative example inputs, reducing the problem to continuous optimization, and mapping the results back to symbolic expressions. We demonstrate that our approach is able to learn foundational algorithms from the differential privacy literature and significantly outperforms natural program synthesis baselines.
9.6LGMar 3, 2020
Analyzing Accuracy Loss in Randomized Smoothing DefensesYue Gao, Harrison Rosenberg, Kassem Fawaz et al.
Recent advances in machine learning (ML) algorithms, especially deep neural networks (DNNs), have demonstrated remarkable success (sometimes exceeding human-level performance) on several tasks, including face and speech recognition. However, ML algorithms are vulnerable to \emph{adversarial attacks}, such test-time, training-time, and backdoor attacks. In test-time attacks an adversary crafts adversarial examples, which are specially crafted perturbations imperceptible to humans which, when added to an input example, force a machine learning model to misclassify the given input example. Adversarial examples are a concern when deploying ML algorithms in critical contexts, such as information security and autonomous driving. Researchers have responded with a plethora of defenses. One promising defense is \emph{randomized smoothing} in which a classifier's prediction is smoothed by adding random noise to the input example we wish to classify. In this paper, we theoretically and empirically explore randomized smoothing. We investigate the effect of randomized smoothing on the feasible hypotheses space, and show that for some noise levels the set of hypotheses which are feasible shrinks due to smoothing, giving one reason why the natural accuracy drops after smoothing. To perform our analysis, we introduce a model for randomized smoothing which abstracts away specifics, such as the exact distribution of the noise. We complement our theoretical results with extensive experiments.
21.7LGMay 24, 2019
Hypothesis Testing Interpretations and Renyi Differential PrivacyBorja Balle, Gilles Barthe, Marco Gaboardi et al.
Differential privacy is a de facto standard in data privacy, with applications in the public and private sectors. A way to explain differential privacy, which is particularly appealing to statistician and social scientists is by means of its statistical hypothesis testing interpretation. Informally, one cannot effectively test whether a specific individual has contributed her data by observing the output of a private mechanism---any test cannot have both high significance and high power. In this paper, we identify some conditions under which a privacy definition given in terms of a statistical divergence satisfies a similar interpretation. These conditions are useful to analyze the distinguishability power of divergences and we use them to study the hypothesis testing interpretation of some relaxations of differential privacy based on Renyi divergence. This analysis also results in an improved conversion rule between these definitions and differential privacy.
24.6LGMar 23, 2019
Data Poisoning against Differentially-Private Learners: Attacks and DefensesYuzhe Ma, Xiaojin Zhu, Justin Hsu
Data poisoning attacks aim to manipulate the model produced by a learning algorithm by adversarially modifying the training set. We consider differential privacy as a defensive measure against this type of attack. We show that such learners are resistant to data poisoning attacks when the adversary is only able to poison a small number of items. However, this protection degrades as the adversary poisons more data. To illustrate, we design attack algorithms targeting objective and output perturbation learners, two standard approaches to differentially-private machine learning. Experiments show that our methods are effective when the attacker is allowed to poison sufficiently many training items.
15.5LOJan 19, 2016
Proving Differential Privacy via Probabilistic CouplingsGilles Barthe, Marco Gaboardi, Benjamin Grégoire et al.
In this paper, we develop compositional methods for formally verifying differential privacy for algorithms whose analysis goes beyond the composition theorem. Our methods are based on the observation that differential privacy has deep connections with a generalization of probabilistic couplings, an established mathematical tool for reasoning about stochastic processes. Even when the composition theorem is not helpful, we can often prove privacy by a coupling argument. We demonstrate our methods on two algorithms: the Exponential mechanism and the Above Threshold algorithm, the critical component of the famous Sparse Vector algorithm. We verify these examples in a relational program logic apRHL+, which can construct approximate couplings. This logic extends the existing apRHL logic with more general rules for the Laplace mechanism and the one-sided Laplace mechanism, and new structural rules enabling pointwise reasoning about privacy; all the rules are inspired by the connection with coupling. While our paper is presented from a formal verification perspective, we believe that its main insight is of independent interest for the differential privacy community.
4.3GTNov 3, 2015
Do Prices Coordinate Markets?Justin Hsu, Jamie Morgenstern, Ryan Rogers et al.
Walrasian equilibrium prices can be said to coordinate markets: They support a welfare optimal allocation in which each buyer is buying bundle of goods that is individually most preferred. However, this clean story has two caveats. First, the prices alone are not sufficient to coordinate the market, and buyers may need to select among their most preferred bundles in a coordinated way to find a feasible allocation. Second, we don't in practice expect to encounter exact equilibrium prices tailored to the market, but instead only approximate prices, somehow encoding "distributional" information about the market. How well do prices work to coordinate markets when tie-breaking is not coordinated, and they encode only distributional information? We answer this question. First, we provide a genericity condition such that for buyers with Matroid Based Valuations, overdemand with respect to equilibrium prices is at most 1, independent of the supply of goods, even when tie-breaking is done in an uncoordinated fashion. Second, we provide learning-theoretic results that show that such prices are robust to changing the buyers in the market, so long as all buyers are sampled from the same (unknown) distribution.
8.0DSAug 14, 2015
Online Assignment of Heterogeneous Tasks in Crowdsourcing MarketsSepehr Assadi, Justin Hsu, Shahin Jabbari
We investigate the problem of heterogeneous task assignment in crowdsourcing markets from the point of view of the requester, who has a collection of tasks. Workers arrive online one by one, and each declare a set of feasible tasks they can solve, and desired payment for each feasible task. The requester must decide on the fly which task (if any) to assign to the worker, while assigning workers only to feasible tasks. The goal is to maximize the number of assigned tasks with a fixed overall budget. We provide an online algorithm for this problem and prove an upper bound on the competitive ratio of this algorithm against an arbitrary (possibly worst-case) sequence of workers who want small payments relative to the requester's total budget. We further show an almost matching lower bound on the competitive ratio of any algorithm in this setting. Finally, we propose a different algorithm that achieves an improved competitive ratio in the random permutation model, where the order of arrival of the workers is chosen uniformly at random. Apart from these strong theoretical guarantees, we carry out experiments on simulated data which demonstrates the practical applicability of our algorithms.
10.8LOJul 10, 2014
Proving differential privacy in Hoare logicGilles Barthe, Marco Gaboardi, Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias et al.
Differential privacy is a rigorous, worst-case notion of privacy-preserving computation. Informally, a probabilistic program is differentially private if the participation of a single individual in the input database has a limited effect on the program's distribution on outputs. More technically, differential privacy is a quantitative 2-safety property that bounds the distance between the output distributions of a probabilistic program on adjacent inputs. Like many 2-safety properties, differential privacy lies outside the scope of traditional verification techniques. Existing approaches to enforce privacy are based on intricate, non-conventional type systems, or customized relational logics. These approaches are difficult to implement and often cumbersome to use. We present an alternative approach that verifies differential privacy by standard, non-relational reasoning on non-probabilistic programs. Our approach transforms a probabilistic program into a non-probabilistic program which simulates two executions of the original program. We prove that if the target program is correct with respect to a Hoare specification, then the original probabilistic program is differentially private. We provide a variety of examples from the differential privacy literature to demonstrate the utility of our approach. Finally, we compare our approach with existing verification techniques for privacy.
14.5DSFeb 15, 2014
Privately Solving Linear ProgramsJustin Hsu, Aaron Roth, Tim Roughgarden et al.
In this paper, we initiate the systematic study of solving linear programs under differential privacy. The first step is simply to define the problem: to this end, we introduce several natural classes of private linear programs that capture different ways sensitive data can be incorporated into a linear program. For each class of linear programs we give an efficient, differentially private solver based on the multiplicative weights framework, or we give an impossibility result.
17.6DSFeb 6, 2014
Dual Query: Practical Private Query Release for High Dimensional DataMarco Gaboardi, Emilio Jesús Gallego Arias, Justin Hsu et al.
We present a practical, differentially private algorithm for answering a large number of queries on high dimensional datasets. Like all algorithms for this task, ours necessarily has worst-case complexity exponential in the dimension of the data. However, our algorithm packages the computationally hard step into a concisely defined integer program, which can be solved non-privately using standard solvers. We prove accuracy and privacy theorems for our algorithm, and then demonstrate experimentally that our algorithm performs well in practice. For example, our algorithm can efficiently and accurately answer millions of queries on the Netflix dataset, which has over 17,000 attributes; this is an improvement on the state of the art by multiple orders of magnitude.