The DCR Delusion: Measuring the Privacy Risk of Synthetic Data

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.01524v1
• Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 18:21:14 GMT
• Title: The DCR Delusion: Measuring the Privacy Risk of Synthetic Data
• Authors: Zexi Yao, Nataša Krčo, Georgi Ganev, Yves-Alexandre de Montjoye,
• Abstract summary: Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) are widely considered the gold standard for empirically assessing the privacy of a synthetic dataset.<n>These metrics estimate privacy by measuring the similarity between the training data and generated synthetic data.<n>In this work we show that, while computationally inexpensive, DCR and other distance-based metrics fail to identify privacy leakage.
• Score: 8.673204690445955
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Synthetic data has become an increasingly popular way to share data without revealing sensitive information. Though Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) are widely considered the gold standard for empirically assessing the privacy of a synthetic dataset, practitioners and researchers often rely on simpler proxy metrics such as Distance to Closest Record (DCR). These metrics estimate privacy by measuring the similarity between the training data and generated synthetic data. This similarity is also compared against that between the training data and a disjoint holdout set of real records to construct a binary privacy test. If the synthetic data is not more similar to the training data than the holdout set is, it passes the test and is considered private. In this work we show that, while computationally inexpensive, DCR and other distance-based metrics fail to identify privacy leakage. Across multiple datasets and both classical models such as Baynet and CTGAN and more recent diffusion models, we show that datasets deemed private by proxy metrics are highly vulnerable to MIAs. We similarly find both the binary privacy test and the continuous measure based on these metrics to be uninformative of actual membership inference risk. We further show that these failures are consistent across different metric hyperparameter settings and record selection methods. Finally, we argue DCR and other distance-based metrics to be flawed by design and show a example of a simple leakage they miss in practice. With this work, we hope to motivate practitioners to move away from proxy metrics to MIAs as the rigorous, comprehensive standard of evaluating privacy of synthetic data, in particular to make claims of datasets being legally anonymous.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Fraud Detectors on Private Graph Data [70.4654745317714]
  Currently, many types of fraud are managed in part by automated detection algorithms that operate over graphs.<n>We consider the scenario where a data holder wishes to outsource development of fraud detectors to third parties.<n>Third parties submit their fraud detectors to the data holder, who evaluates these algorithms on a private dataset and then publicly communicates the results.<n>We propose a realistic privacy attack on this system that allows an adversary to de-anonymize individuals' data based only on the evaluation results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T03:20:15Z)
• Position: All Current Generative Fidelity and Diversity Metrics are Flawed [58.815519650465774]
  We show that all current generative fidelity and diversity metrics are flawed.<n>Our aim is to convince the research community to spend more effort in developing metrics, instead of models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-28T15:10:33Z)
• Contrastive Learning-Based privacy metrics in Tabular Synthetic Datasets [40.67424997797513]
  Synthetic data has garnered attention as a Privacy Enhancing Technology (PET) in sectors such as healthcare and finance.<n>Similarity-based methods aim at finding the level of similarity between training and synthetic data.<n>Attack-based methods conduce deliberate attacks on synthetic datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T15:52:23Z)
• Defining 'Good': Evaluation Framework for Synthetic Smart Meter Data [14.779917834583577]
  We show that standard privacy attack methods are inadequate for assessing privacy risks of smart meter datasets. We propose an improved method by injecting training data with implausible outliers, then launching privacy attacks directly on these outliers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T14:41:27Z)
• Geometry-Aware Instrumental Variable Regression [56.16884466478886]
  We propose a transport-based IV estimator that takes into account the geometry of the data manifold through data-derivative information. We provide a simple plug-and-play implementation of our method that performs on par with related estimators in standard settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-19T17:49:33Z)
• The Inadequacy of Similarity-based Privacy Metrics: Privacy Attacks against "Truly Anonymous" Synthetic Datasets [12.730435519914415]
  We examine the privacy metrics used in real-world synthetic data deployments and demonstrate their unreliability in several ways.<n>We introduce ReconSyn, a reconstruction attack that generates multiple synthetic datasets that are considered private by the metrics but actually leak unique information to individual records.<n>We show that ReconSyn recovers 78-100% of the outliers in the train data with only black-box access to a single fitted generative model and the privacy metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T15:42:28Z)
• Achilles' Heels: Vulnerable Record Identification in Synthetic Data Publishing [9.061271587514215]
  We propose a principled vulnerable record identification technique for synthetic data publishing. We show it to strongly outperform previous ad-hoc methods across datasets and generators. We show it to accurately identify vulnerable records when synthetic data generators are made differentially private.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-17T09:42:46Z)
• Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs [54.262044436203965]
  We introduce a holistic auditing framework that comprehensively evaluates synthetic datasets and AI models. It focuses on preventing bias and discrimination, ensures fidelity to the source data, assesses utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We demonstrate the framework's effectiveness by auditing various generative models across diverse use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T09:03:18Z)
• Membership Inference Attacks against Synthetic Data through Overfitting Detection [84.02632160692995]
  We argue for a realistic MIA setting that assumes the attacker has some knowledge of the underlying data distribution. We propose DOMIAS, a density-based MIA model that aims to infer membership by targeting local overfitting of the generative model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-24T11:27:39Z)
• No Free Lunch in "Privacy for Free: How does Dataset Condensation Help Privacy" [75.98836424725437]
  New methods designed to preserve data privacy require careful scrutiny. Failure to preserve privacy is hard to detect, and yet can lead to catastrophic results when a system implementing a privacy-preserving'' method is attacked.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-29T17:50:23Z)
• Representative & Fair Synthetic Data [68.8204255655161]
  We present a framework to incorporate fairness constraints into the self-supervised learning process. We generate a representative as well as fair version of the UCI Adult census data set. We consider representative & fair synthetic data a promising future building block to teach algorithms not on historic worlds, but rather on the worlds that we strive to live in.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-07T09:19:46Z)

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.