Researcher profile

Danfeng Zhang

Danfeng Zhang contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 19 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
5works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Demystifying Arch-hints for Model Extraction: An Attack in Unified Memory System

The deep neural network (DNN) models are deemed confidential due to their unique value in expensive training efforts, privacy-sensitive training data, and proprietary network characteristics. Consequently, the model value raises incentive for adversary to steal the model for profits, such as the representative model extraction attack. Emerging attack can leverage timing-sensitive architecture-level events (i.e., Arch-hints) disclosed in hardware platforms to extract DNN model layer information accurately. In this paper, we take the first step to uncover the root cause of such Arch-hints and summarize the principles to identify them. We then apply these principles to emerging Unified Memory (UM) management system and identify three new Arch-hints caused by UM's unique data movement patterns. We then develop a new extraction attack, UMProbe. We also create the first DNN benchmark suite in UM and utilize the benchmark suite to evaluate UMProbe. Our evaluation shows that UMProbe can extract the layer sequence with an accuracy of 95% for almost all victim test models, which thus calls for more attention to the DNN security in UM system.

preprint2022arXiv

Exact Privacy Analysis of the Gaussian Sparse Histogram Mechanism

Sparse histogram methods can be useful for returning differentially private counts of items in large or infinite histograms, large group-by queries, and more generally, releasing a set of statistics with sufficient item counts. We consider the Gaussian version of the sparse histogram mechanism and study the exact $ε,δ$ differential privacy guarantees satisfied by this mechanism. We compare these exact $ε,δ$ parameters to the simpler overestimates used in prior work to quantify the impact of their looser privacy bounds.

preprint2022arXiv

Reconstruction Attacks on Aggressive Relaxations of Differential Privacy

Differential privacy is a widely accepted formal privacy definition that allows aggregate information about a dataset to be released while controlling privacy leakage for individuals whose records appear in the data. Due to the unavoidable tension between privacy and utility, there have been many works trying to relax the requirements of differential privacy to achieve greater utility. One class of relaxation, which is starting to gain support outside the privacy community is embodied by the definitions of individual differential privacy (IDP) and bootstrap differential privacy (BDP). The original version of differential privacy defines a set of neighboring database pairs and achieves its privacy guarantees by requiring that each pair of neighbors should be nearly indistinguishable to an attacker. The privacy definitions we study, however, aggressively reduce the set of neighboring pairs that are protected. Both IDP and BDP define a measure of "privacy loss" that satisfies formal privacy properties such as postprocessing invariance and composition, and achieve dramatically better utility than the traditional variants of differential privacy. However, there is a significant downside - we show that they allow a significant portion of the dataset to be reconstructed using algorithms that have arbitrarily low privacy loss under their privacy accounting rules. We demonstrate these attacks using the preferred mechanisms of these privacy definitions. In particular, we design a set of queries that, when protected by these mechanisms with high noise settings (i.e., with claims of very low privacy loss), yield more precise information about the dataset than if they were not protected at all.

preprint2020arXiv

CheckDP: An Automated and Integrated Approach for Proving Differential Privacy or Finding Precise Counterexamples

We propose CheckDP, the first automated and integrated approach for proving or disproving claims that a mechanism is differentially private. CheckDP can find counterexamples for mechanisms with subtle bugs for which prior counterexample generators have failed. Furthermore, it was able to \emph{automatically} generate proofs for correct mechanisms for which no formal verification was reported before. CheckDP is built on static program analysis, allowing it to be more efficient and more precise in catching infrequent events than existing counterexample generators (which run mechanisms hundreds of thousands of times to estimate their output distribution). Moreover, its sound approach also allows automatic verification of correct mechanisms. When evaluated on standard benchmarks and newer privacy mechanisms, CheckDP generates proofs (for correct mechanisms) and counterexamples (for incorrect mechanisms) within 70 seconds without any false positives or false negatives.

preprint2020arXiv

Guidelines for Implementing and Auditing Differentially Private Systems

Differential privacy is an information theoretic constraint on algorithms and code. It provides quantification of privacy leakage and formal privacy guarantees that are currently considered the gold standard in privacy protections. In this paper we provide an initial set of "best practices" for developing differentially private platforms, techniques for unit testing that are specific to differential privacy, guidelines for checking if differential privacy is being applied correctly in an application, and recommendations for parameter settings. The genesis of this paper was an initiative by Facebook and Social Science One to provide social science researchers with programmatic access to a URL-shares dataset. In order to maximize the utility of the data for research while protecting privacy, researchers should access the data through an interactive platform that supports differential privacy. The intention of this paper is to provide guidelines and recommendations that can generally be re-used in a wide variety of systems. For this reason, no specific platforms will be named, except for systems whose details and theory appear in academic papers.