Attacks and Defenses for Generative Diffusion Models: A Comprehensive Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diffusion models (DMs) have achieved state-of-the-art performance on various generative tasks such as image synthesis, text-to-image, and text-guided image-to-image generation. However, the more powerful the DMs, the more harmful they can potentially be. Recent studies have shown that DMs are prone to a wide range of attacks, including adversarial attacks, membership inference attacks, backdoor injection, and various multi-modal threats. Since numerous pre-trained DMs are published widely on the Internet, potential threats from these attacks are especially detrimental to society, making DM-related security a topic worthy of investigation. Therefore, in this article, we conduct a comprehensive survey on the security aspect of DMs, focusing on various attack and defense methods for DMs. First, we present crucial knowledge of DMs with five main types of DMs, including denoising diffusion probabilistic models, denoising diffusion implicit models, noise conditioned score networks, stochastic differential equations, and multi-modal conditional DMs. We provide a comprehensive survey of recent works investigating different types of attacks that exploit the vulnerabilities of DMs. Then, we thoroughly review potential countermeasures to mitigate each of the presented threats. Finally, we discuss open challenges of DM-related security and describe potential research directions for this topic.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".