Paper detail

Secure Evaluation of Quantized Neural Networks

We investigate two questions in this paper: First, we ask to what extent "MPC friendly" models are already supported by major Machine Learning frameworks such as TensorFlow or PyTorch. Prior works provide protocols that only work on fixed-point integers and specialized activation functions, two aspects that are not supported by popular Machine Learning frameworks, and the need for these specialized model representations means that it is hard, and often impossible, to use e.g., TensorFlow to design, train and test models that later have to be evaluated securely. Second, we ask to what extent the functionality for evaluating Neural Networks already exists in general-purpose MPC frameworks. These frameworks have received more scrutiny, are better documented and supported on more platforms. Furthermore, they are typically flexible in terms of the threat model they support. In contrast, most secure evaluation protocols in the literature are targeted to a specific threat model and their implementations are only a "proof-of-concept", making it very hard for their adoption in practice. We answer both of the above questions in a positive way: We observe that the quantization techniques supported by both TensorFlow, PyTorch and MXNet can provide models in a representation that can be evaluated securely; and moreover, that this evaluation can be performed by a general purpose MPC framework. We perform extensive benchmarks to understand the exact trade-offs between different corruption models, network sizes and efficiency. These experiments provide an interesting insight into cost between active and passive security, as well as honest and dishonest majority. Our work shows then that the separating line between existing ML frameworks and existing MPC protocols may be narrower than implicitly suggested by previous works.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.