MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Vulnerability of Open-Source Face Recognition Systems to Blackbox Attacks: A Case Study with InsightFace

2023· article· en· W4390489161 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceFacial recognition systemOpen sourceSwap (finance)Computer securityFace (sociological concept)Principal (computer security)Vulnerability (computing)Authentication (law)MorphingPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceSoftwareOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the security aspects of the InsightFace project (a popular open-source face recognition system) focusing on its susceptibility to three distinct black box attacks: Face Swap, Morphing, and Presentation. Open-source face recognition models are used in commercial applications, thereby motivating our security analysis. Our investigation entails a meticulous evaluation of the susceptibility of the project to false authentication when subjected to the three attacks. We observed from our experiments that InsightFace was not able to differentiate between legitimate images and manipulated images. The principal aim of this research is to draw attention to the security challenges inherent in open-source face recognition systems, often integrated into various public applications.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.571
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207