Abstract:Diffusion Models (DMs) benefit from large and diverse datasets for their training. Since this data is often scraped from the Internet without permission from the data owners, this raises concerns about copyright and intellectual property protections. While (illicit) use of data is easily detected for training samples perfectly re-created by a DM at inference time, it is much harder for data owners to verify if their data was used for training when the outputs from the suspect DM are not close replicas. Conceptually, membership inference attacks (MIAs), which detect if a given data point was used during training, present themselves as a suitable tool to address this challenge. However, we demonstrate that existing MIAs are not strong enough to reliably determine the membership of individual images in large, state-of-the-art DMs. To overcome this limitation, we propose CDI, a framework for data owners to identify whether their dataset was used to train a given DM. CDI relies on dataset inference techniques, i.e., instead of using the membership signal from a single data point, CDI leverages the fact that most data owners, such as providers of stock photography, visual media companies, or even individual artists, own datasets with multiple publicly exposed data points which might all be included in the training of a given DM. By selectively aggregating signals from existing MIAs and using new handcrafted methods to extract features for these datasets, feeding them to a scoring model, and applying rigorous statistical testing, CDI allows data owners with as little as 70 data points to identify with a confidence of more than 99% whether their data was used to train a given DM. Thereby, CDI represents a valuable tool for data owners to claim illegitimate use of their copyrighted data.
Abstract:Large-scale vision models have become integral in many applications due to their unprecedented performance and versatility across downstream tasks. However, the robustness of these foundation models has primarily been explored for a single task, namely image classification. The vulnerability of other common vision tasks, such as semantic segmentation and depth estimation, remains largely unknown. We present a comprehensive empirical evaluation of the adversarial robustness of self-supervised vision encoders across multiple downstream tasks. Our attacks operate in the encoder embedding space and at the downstream task output level. In both cases, current state-of-the-art adversarial fine-tuning techniques tested only for classification significantly degrade clean and robust performance on other tasks. Since the purpose of a foundation model is to cater to multiple applications at once, our findings reveal the need to enhance encoder robustness more broadly. Our code is available at ${github.com/layer6ai-labs/ssl-robustness}$.
Abstract:Generative diffusion models, including Stable Diffusion and Midjourney, can generate visually appealing, diverse, and high-resolution images for various applications. These models are trained on billions of internet-sourced images, raising significant concerns about the potential unauthorized use of copyright-protected images. In this paper, we examine whether it is possible to determine if a specific image was used in the training set, a problem known in the cybersecurity community and referred to as a membership inference attack. Our focus is on Stable Diffusion, and we address the challenge of designing a fair evaluation framework to answer this membership question. We propose a methodology to establish a fair evaluation setup and apply it to Stable Diffusion, enabling potential extensions to other generative models. Utilizing this evaluation setup, we execute membership attacks (both known and newly introduced). Our research reveals that previously proposed evaluation setups do not provide a full understanding of the effectiveness of membership inference attacks. We conclude that the membership inference attack remains a significant challenge for large diffusion models (often deployed as black-box systems), indicating that related privacy and copyright issues will persist in the foreseeable future.