A Generalized Shuffle Framework for Privacy Amplification: Strengthening Privacy Guarantees and Enhancing Utility

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.14388v3
• Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 08:52:50 GMT
• Title: A Generalized Shuffle Framework for Privacy Amplification: Strengthening Privacy Guarantees and Enhancing Utility
• Authors: E Chen, Yang Cao, Yifei Ge,
• Abstract summary: We show how to shuffle $(epsilon_i,delta_i)$-PLDP setting with personalized privacy parameters. We prove that shuffled $(epsilon_i,delta_i)$-PLDP process approximately preserves $mu$-Gaussian Differential Privacy with mu = sqrtfrac2sum_i=1n frac1-delta_i1+eepsilon_i-max_ifrac1-delta_i1+e
• Score: 4.7712438974100255
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The shuffle model of local differential privacy is an advanced method of privacy amplification designed to enhance privacy protection with high utility. It achieves this by randomly shuffling sensitive data, making linking individual data points to specific individuals more challenging. However, most existing studies have focused on the shuffle model based on $(\epsilon_0,0)$-Locally Differentially Private (LDP) randomizers, with limited consideration for complex scenarios such as $(\epsilon_0,\delta_0)$-LDP or personalized LDP (PLDP). This hinders a comprehensive understanding of the shuffle model's potential and limits its application in various settings. To bridge this research gap, we propose a generalized shuffle framework that can be applied to any $(\epsilon_i,\delta_i)$-PLDP setting with personalized privacy parameters. This generalization allows for a broader exploration of the privacy-utility trade-off and facilitates the design of privacy-preserving analyses in diverse contexts. We prove that shuffled $(\epsilon_i,\delta_i)$-PLDP process approximately preserves $\mu$-Gaussian Differential Privacy with \mu = \sqrt{\frac{2}{\sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{1-\delta_i}{1+e^{\epsilon_i}}-\max_{i}{\frac{1-\delta_{i}}{1+e^{\epsilon_{i}}}}}}. $ This approach allows us to avoid the limitations and potential inaccuracies associated with inequality estimations. To strengthen the privacy guarantee, we improve the lower bound by utilizing hypothesis testing} instead of relying on rough estimations like the Chernoff bound or Hoeffding's inequality. Furthermore, extensive comparative evaluations clearly show that our approach outperforms existing methods in achieving strong central privacy guarantees while preserving the utility of the global model. We have also carefully designed corresponding algorithms for average function, frequency estimation, and stochastic gradient descent.

Related papers

• Enhanced Privacy Bound for Shuffle Model with Personalized Privacy [32.08637708405314]
  Differential Privacy (DP) is an enhanced privacy protocol which introduces an intermediate trusted server between local users and a central data curator. It significantly amplifies the central DP guarantee by anonymizing and shuffling the local randomized data. This work focuses on deriving the central privacy bound for a more practical setting where personalized local privacy is required by each user.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-25T16:11:56Z)
• Analyzing Privacy Leakage in Machine Learning via Multiple Hypothesis Testing: A Lesson From Fano [83.5933307263932]
  We study data reconstruction attacks for discrete data and analyze it under the framework of hypothesis testing. We show that if the underlying private data takes values from a set of size $M$, then the target privacy parameter $epsilon$ can be $O(log M)$ before the adversary gains significant inferential power.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T23:50:12Z)
• Normalized/Clipped SGD with Perturbation for Differentially Private Non-Convex Optimization [94.06564567766475]
  DP-SGD and DP-NSGD mitigate the risk of large models memorizing sensitive training data. We show that these two algorithms achieve similar best accuracy while DP-NSGD is comparatively easier to tune than DP-SGD.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-27T03:45:02Z)
• Individual Privacy Accounting for Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent [69.14164921515949]
  We characterize privacy guarantees for individual examples when releasing models trained by DP-SGD. We find that most examples enjoy stronger privacy guarantees than the worst-case bound. This implies groups that are underserved in terms of model utility simultaneously experience weaker privacy guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-06T13:49:37Z)
• Privacy Amplification via Shuffling for Linear Contextual Bandits [51.94904361874446]
  We study the contextual linear bandit problem with differential privacy (DP) We show that it is possible to achieve a privacy/utility trade-off between JDP and LDP by leveraging the shuffle model of privacy. Our result shows that it is possible to obtain a tradeoff between JDP and LDP by leveraging the shuffle model while preserving local privacy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-11T15:23:28Z)
• Learning with User-Level Privacy [61.62978104304273]
  We analyze algorithms to solve a range of learning tasks under user-level differential privacy constraints. Rather than guaranteeing only the privacy of individual samples, user-level DP protects a user's entire contribution. We derive an algorithm that privately answers a sequence of $K$ adaptively chosen queries with privacy cost proportional to $tau$, and apply it to solve the learning tasks we consider.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-23T18:25:13Z)
• Hiding Among the Clones: A Simple and Nearly Optimal Analysis of Privacy Amplification by Shuffling [49.43288037509783]
  We show that random shuffling amplifies differential privacy guarantees of locally randomized data. Our result is based on a new approach that is simpler than previous work and extends to approximate differential privacy with nearly the same guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-23T17:07:26Z)
• Privacy Amplification via Random Check-Ins [38.72327434015975]
  Differentially Private Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) forms a fundamental building block in many applications for learning over sensitive data. In this paper, we focus on conducting iterative methods like DP-SGD in the setting of federated learning (FL) wherein the data is distributed among many devices (clients) Our main contribution is the emphrandom check-in distributed protocol, which crucially relies only on randomized participation decisions made locally and independently by each client.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T18:14:09Z)
• Successive Refinement of Privacy [38.20887036580742]
  This work examines how much randomness is needed to achieve local differential privacy (LDP) A motivating scenario is providing multiple levels of privacy to multiple analysts, either for distribution or for heavy-hitter estimation. We show that we cannot reuse random keys over time while preserving privacy of each user.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-24T04:16:01Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.