Large language models (LMs) have been shown to memorize parts of their training data, and when prompted appropriately, they will emit the memorized training data verbatim. This is undesirable because memorization violates privacy (exposing user data), degrades utility (repeated easy-to-memorize text is often low quality), and hurts fairness (some texts are memorized over others). We describe three log-linear relationships that quantify the degree to which LMs emit memorized training data. Memorization significantly grows as we increase (1) the capacity of a model, (2) the number of times an example has been duplicated, and (3) the number of tokens of context used to prompt the model. Surprisingly, we find the situation becomes more complicated when generalizing these results across model families. On the whole, we find that memorization in LMs is more prevalent than previously believed and will likely get worse as models continues to scale, at least without active mitigations.

Model distillation (Hinton et al., 2015) is a common framework for knowledge transfer, where knowledge learned by a "teacher model" is transferred to a "student model" via the teacher's predictions. Distillation is helpful because the teacher's predictions are a more useful guide for the student model than hard labels; this phenomenon has been explained by the teacher's predictions containing some useful "dark knowledge". Variants of model distillation have been proposed for, e.g., model compression (Hinton et al., 2015; Ba & Caruana, 2014; Polino et al., 2018; Kim et al., 2018; Sun et al., 2019) or training more accurate models (Zagoruyko & Komodakis, 2016; Xie et al., 2020). Within the privacy-preserving machine learning community, distillation has been adapted to protect the privacy of a training dataset (Papernot et al., 2016; Tang et al., 2022; Shejwalkar & Houmansadr, 2021; Mazzone et al., 2022). Many of these approaches rely on the intuition that distilling the teacher model serves as a privacy barrier that protects the teacher's training data. Informally, restricting the student to learn only from the teacher's predictions is a form of data minimization, which should result in less private information being fed into, and memorized by, the student. This privacy barrier around the teacher also allows the teacher model to be trained with strong, non-private, training approaches, improving both the teacher model's and student model's accuracy. Because model distillation does not provide a rigorous privacy guarantee (such as those offered by differential privacy (Dwork et al., 2006)), in our work we evaluate the empirical privacy provided by these

In this paper we show how to achieve state-of-the-art certified adversarial robustness to 2-norm bounded perturbations by relying exclusively on off-the-shelf pretrained models. To do so, we instantiate the denoised smoothing approach of Salman et al. 2020 by combining a pretrained denoising diffusion probabilistic model and a standard high-accuracy classifier. This allows us to certify 71% accuracy on ImageNet under adversarial perturbations constrained to be within an 2-norm of 0.5, an improvement of 14 percentage points over the prior certified SoTA using any approach, or an improvement of 30 percentage points over denoised smoothing. We obtain these results using only pretrained diffusion models and image classifiers, without requiring any fine tuning or retraining of model parameters.

It is becoming increasingly imperative to design robust ML defenses. However, recent work has found that many defenses that initially resist state-of-the-art attacks can be broken by an adaptive adversary. In this work we take steps to simplify the design of defenses and argue that white-box defenses should eschew randomness when possible. We begin by illustrating a new issue with the deployment of randomized defenses that reduces their security compared to their deterministic counterparts. We then provide evidence that making defenses deterministic simplifies robustness evaluation, without reducing the effectiveness of a truly robust defense. Finally, we introduce a new defense evaluation framework that leverages a defense's deterministic nature to better evaluate its adversarial robustness.

Deep learning models are often trained on distributed, webscale datasets crawled from the internet. In this paper, we introduce two new dataset poisoning attacks that intentionally introduce malicious examples to a model's performance. Our attacks are immediately practical and could, today, poison 10 popular datasets. Our first attack, split-view poisoning, exploits the mutable nature of internet content to ensure a dataset annotator's initial view of the dataset differs from the view downloaded by subsequent clients. By exploiting specific invalid trust assumptions, we show how we could have poisoned 0.01% of the LAION-400M or COYO-700M datasets for just $60 USD. Our second attack, frontrunning poisoning, targets web-scale datasets that periodically snapshot crowd-sourced content -- such as Wikipedia -- where an attacker only needs a time-limited window to inject malicious examples. In light of both attacks, we notify the maintainers of each affected dataset and recommended several low-overhead defenses.

Auditing mechanisms for differential privacy use probabilistic means to empirically estimate the privacy level of an algorithm. For private machine learning, existing auditing mechanisms are tight: the empirical privacy estimate (nearly) matches the algorithm's provable privacy guarantee. But these auditing techniques suffer from two limitations. First, they only give tight estimates under implausible worst-case assumptions (e.g., a fully adversarial dataset). Second, they require thousands or millions of training runs to produce non-trivial statistical estimates of the privacy leakage. This work addresses both issues. We design an improved auditing scheme that yields tight privacy estimates for natural (not adversarially crafted) datasets -- if the adversary can see all model updates during training. Prior auditing works rely on the same assumption, which is permitted under the standard differential privacy threat model. This threat model is also applicable, e.g., in federated learning settings. Moreover, our auditing scheme requires only two training runs (instead of thousands) to produce tight privacy estimates, by adapting recent advances in tight composition theorems for differential privacy. We demonstrate the utility of our improved auditing schemes by surfacing implementation bugs in private machine learning code that eluded prior auditing techniques.

Image diffusion models such as DALL-E 2, Imagen, and Stable Diffusion have attracted significant attention due to their ability to generate high-quality synthetic images. In this work, we show that diffusion models memorize individual images from their training data and emit them at generation time. With a generate-and-filter pipeline, we extract over a thousand training examples from state-of-the-art models, ranging from photographs of individual people to trademarked company logos. We also train hundreds of diffusion models in various settings to analyze how different modeling and data decisions affect privacy. Overall, our results show that diffusion models are much less private than prior generative models such as GANs, and that mitigating these vulnerabilities may require new advances in privacy-preserving training.

Recent increases in the computational demands of deep neural networks (DNNs) have sparked interest in efficient deep learning mechanisms, e.g., quantization or pruning. These mechanisms enable the construction of a small, efficient version of commercial-scale models with comparable accuracy, accelerating their deployment to resource-constrained devices. In this paper, we study the security considerations of publishing on-device variants of large-scale models. We first show that an adversary can exploit on-device models to make attacking the large models easier. In evaluations across 19 DNNs, by exploiting the published on-device models as a transfer prior, the adversarial vulnerability of the original commercial-scale models increases by up to 100x. We then show that the vulnerability increases as the similarity between a full-scale and its efficient model increase. Based on the insights, we propose a defense, $similarity$-$unpairing$, that fine-tunes on-device models with the objective of reducing the similarity. We evaluated our defense on all the 19 DNNs and found that it reduces the transferability up to 90% and the number of queries required by a factor of 10-100x. Our results suggest that further research is needed on the security (or even privacy) threats caused by publishing those efficient siblings.

The performance of differentially private machine learning can be boosted significantly by leveraging the transfer learning capabilities of non-private models pretrained on large public datasets. We critically review this approach. We primarily question whether the use of large Web-scraped datasets should be viewed as differential-privacy-preserving. We caution that publicizing these models pretrained on Web data as "private" could lead to harm and erode the public's trust in differential privacy as a meaningful definition of privacy. Beyond the privacy considerations of using public data, we further question the utility of this paradigm. We scrutinize whether existing machine learning benchmarks are appropriate for measuring the ability of pretrained models to generalize to sensitive domains, which may be poorly represented in public Web data. Finally, we notice that pretraining has been especially impactful for the largest available models -- models sufficiently large to prohibit end users running them on their own devices. Thus, deploying such models today could be a net loss for privacy, as it would require (private) data to be outsourced to a more compute-powerful third party. We conclude by discussing potential paths forward for the field of private learning, as public pretraining becomes more popular and powerful.

Modern neural language models widely used in tasks across NLP risk memorizing sensitive information from their training data. As models continue to scale up in parameters, training data, and compute, understanding memorization in language models is both important from a learning-theoretical point of view, and is practically crucial in real world applications. An open question in previous studies of memorization in language models is how to filter out "common" memorization. In fact, most memorization criteria strongly correlate with the number of occurrences in the training set, capturing "common" memorization such as familiar phrases, public knowledge or templated texts. In this paper, we provide a principled perspective inspired by a taxonomy of human memory in Psychology. From this perspective, we formulate a notion of counterfactual memorization, which characterizes how a model's predictions change if a particular document is omitted during training. We identify and study counterfactually-memorized training examples in standard text datasets. We further estimate the influence of each training example on the validation set and on generated texts, and show that this can provide direct evidence of the source of memorization at test time.