Exposing the Vulnerability of Decentralized Learning to Membership Inference Attacks Through the Lens of Graph Mixing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary promise of decentralized learning is to allow users to engage in the training of machine learning models in a collaborative manner while keeping their data on their premises and without relying on any central entity. However, this paradigm necessitates the exchange of model parameters or gradients between peers. Such exchanges can be exploited to infer sensitive information about training data, which is achieved through privacy attacks (e.g., Membership Inference Attacks - MIA). In order to devise effective defense mechanisms, it is important to understand the factors that increase/reduce the vulnerability of a given decentralized learning architecture to MIA. In this study, we extensively explore the vulnerability to MIA of various decentralized learning architectures by varying the graph structure (e.g., number of neighbors), the graph dynamics, and the aggregation strategy, across diverse datasets and data distributions. Our key finding, which to the best of our knowledge we are the first to report, is that the vulnerability to MIA is heavily correlated to (i) the local model mixing strategy performed by each node upon reception of models from neighboring nodes and (ii) the global mixing properties of the communication graph. We illustrate these results experimentally using four datasets and by theoretically analyzing the mixing properties of various decentralized architectures. We also empirically show that enhancing mixing properties is highly beneficial when combined with other privacy-preserving techniques such as Differential Privacy. Our paper draws a set of lessons learned for devising decentralized learning systems that reduce by design the vulnerability to MIA.
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 | 0.008 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".