Daniel Fabbri

Chao Yan, Haifeng Xu, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik et al.

Routine operational use of sensitive data is often governed by law and regulation. For instance, in the medical domain, there are various statues at the state and federal level that dictate who is permitted to work with patients' records and under what conditions. To screen for potential privacy breaches, logging systems are usually deployed to trigger alerts whenever suspicious access is detected. However, such mechanisms are often inefficient because 1) the vast majority of triggered alerts are false positives, 2) small budgets make it unlikely that a real attack will be detected, and 3) attackers can behave strategically, such that traditional auditing mechanisms cannot easily catch them. To improve efficiency, information systems may invoke signaling, so that whenever a suspicious access request occurs, the system can, in real time, warn the user that the access may be audited. Then, at the close of a finite period, a selected subset of suspicious accesses are audited. This gives rise to an online problem in which one needs to determine 1) whether a warning should be triggered and 2) the likelihood that the data request event will be audited. In this paper, we formalize this auditing problem as a Signaling Audit Game (SAG), in which we model the interactions between an auditor and an attacker in the context of signaling and the usability cost is represented as a factor of the auditor's payoff. We study the properties of its Stackelberg equilibria and develop a scalable approach to compute its solution. We show that a strategic presentation of warnings adds value in that SAGs realize significantly higher utility for the auditor than systems without signaling. We illustrate the value of the proposed auditing model and the consistency of its advantages over existing baseline methods.

Chao Yan, Bo Li, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik et al.

For enhancing the privacy protections of databases, where the increasing amount of detailed personal data is stored and processed, multiple mechanisms have been developed, such as audit logging and alert triggers, which notify administrators about suspicious activities; however, the two main limitations in common are: 1) the volume of such alerts is often substantially greater than the capabilities of resource-constrained organizations, and 2) strategic attackers may disguise their actions or carefully choosing which records they touch, making incompetent the statistical detection models. For solving them, we introduce a novel approach to database auditing that explicitly accounts for adversarial behavior by 1) prioritizing the order in which types of alerts are investigated and 2) providing an upper bound on how much resource to allocate for each type. We model the interaction between a database auditor and potential attackers as a Stackelberg game in which the auditor chooses an auditing policy and attackers choose which records to target. A corresponding approach combining linear programming, column generation, and heuristic search is proposed to derive an auditing policy. For testing the policy-searching performance, a publicly available credit card application dataset are adopted, on which it shows that our methods produce high-quality mixed strategies as database audit policies, and our general approach significantly outperforms non-game-theoretic baselines.