Watermarking Training Data of Music Generation Models

Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen-AI) models are increasingly used to produce content across domains, including text, images, and audio. While these models represent a major technical breakthrough, they gain their generative capabilities from being trained on enormous amounts of human-generated content, which often includes copyrighted material. In this work, we investigate whether audio watermarking techniques can be used to detect an unauthorized usage of content to train a music generation model. We compare outputs generated by a model trained on watermarked data to a model trained on non-watermarked data. We study factors that impact the model's generation behaviour: the watermarking technique, the proportion of watermarked samples in the training set, and the robustness of the watermarking technique against the model's tokenizer. Our results show that audio watermarking techniques, including some that are imperceptible to humans, can lead to noticeable shifts in the model's outputs. We also study the robustness of a state-of-the-art watermarking technique to removal techniques.

Free Record-Level Privacy Risk Evaluation Through Artifact-Based Methods

Membership inference attacks (MIAs) are widely used to empirically assess the privacy risks of samples used to train a target machine learning model. State-of-the-art methods however require training hundreds of shadow models, with the same size and architecture of the target model, solely to evaluate the privacy risk. While one might be able to afford this for small models, the cost often becomes prohibitive for medium and large models. We here instead propose a novel approach to identify the at-risk samples using only artifacts available during training, with little to no additional computational overhead. Our method analyzes individual per-sample loss traces and uses them to identify the vulnerable data samples. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our artifact-based approach through experiments on the CIFAR10 dataset, showing high precision in identifying vulnerable samples as determined by a SOTA shadow model-based MIA (LiRA). Impressively, our method reaches the same precision as another SOTA MIA when measured against LiRA, despite it being orders of magnitude cheaper. We then show LT-IQR to outperform alternative loss aggregation methods, perform ablation studies on hyperparameters, and validate the robustness of our method to the target metric. Finally, we study the evolution of the vulnerability score distribution throughout training as a metric for model-level risk assessment.

QueryCheetah: Fast Automated Discovery of Attribute Inference Attacks Against Query-Based Systems

Query-based systems (QBSs) are one of the key approaches for sharing data. QBSs allow analysts to request aggregate information from a private protected dataset. Attacks are a crucial part of ensuring QBSs are truly privacy-preserving. The development and testing of attacks is however very labor-intensive and unable to cope with the increasing complexity of systems. Automated approaches have been shown to be promising but are currently extremely computationally intensive, limiting their applicability in practice. We here propose QueryCheetah, a fast and effective method for automated discovery of privacy attacks against QBSs. We instantiate QueryCheetah on attribute inference attacks and show it to discover stronger attacks than previous methods while being 18 times faster than the state-of-the-art automated approach. We then show how QueryCheetah allows system developers to thoroughly evaluate the privacy risk, including for various attacker strengths and target individuals. We finally show how QueryCheetah can be used out-of-the-box to find attacks in larger syntaxes and workarounds around ad-hoc defenses.

A Zero Auxiliary Knowledge Membership Inference Attack on Aggregate Location Data

Location data is frequently collected from populations and shared in aggregate form to guide policy and decision making. However, the prevalence of aggregated data also raises the privacy concern of membership inference attacks (MIAs). MIAs infer whether an individual's data contributed to the aggregate release. Although effective MIAs have been developed for aggregate location data, these require access to an extensive auxiliary dataset of individual traces over the same locations, which are collected from a similar population. This assumption is often impractical given common privacy practices surrounding location data. To measure the risk of an MIA performed by a realistic adversary, we develop the first Zero Auxiliary Knowledge (ZK) MIA on aggregate location data, which eliminates the need for an auxiliary dataset of real individual traces. Instead, we develop a novel synthetic approach, such that suitable synthetic traces are generated from the released aggregate. We also develop methods to correct for bias and noise, to show that our synthetic-based attack is still applicable when privacy mechanisms are applied prior to release. Using two large-scale location datasets, we demonstrate that our ZK MIA matches the state-of-the-art Knock-Knock (KK) MIA across a wide range of settings, including popular implementations of differential privacy (DP) and suppression of small counts. Furthermore, we show that ZK MIA remains highly effective even when the adversary only knows a small fraction (10%) of their target's location history. This demonstrates that effective MIAs can be performed by realistic adversaries, highlighting the need for strong DP protection.

Inherent Challenges of Post-Hoc Membership Inference for Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) are often trained on vast amounts of undisclosed data, motivating the development of post-hoc Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) to gain insight into their training data composition. However, in this paper, we identify inherent challenges in post-hoc MIA evaluation due to potential distribution shifts between collected member and non-member datasets. Using a simple bag-of-words classifier, we demonstrate that datasets used in recent post-hoc MIAs suffer from significant distribution shifts, in some cases achieving near-perfect distinction between members and non-members. This implies that previously reported high MIA performance may be largely attributable to these shifts rather than model memorization. We confirm that randomized, controlled setups eliminate such shifts and thus enable the development and fair evaluation of new MIAs. However, we note that such randomized setups are rarely available for the latest LLMs, making post-hoc data collection still required to infer membership for real-world LLMs. As a potential solution, we propose a Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) approach for post-hoc data collection, which substantially mitigates distribution shifts. Evaluating various MIA methods on this RDD setup yields performance barely above random guessing, in stark contrast to previously reported results. Overall, our findings highlight the challenges in accurately measuring LLM memorization and the need for careful experimental design in (post-hoc) membership inference tasks.

Lost in the Averages: A New Specific Setup to Evaluate Membership Inference Attacks Against Machine Learning Models

Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs) are widely used to evaluate the propensity of a machine learning (ML) model to memorize an individual record and the privacy risk releasing the model poses. MIAs are commonly evaluated similarly to ML models: the MIA is performed on a test set of models trained on datasets unseen during training, which are sampled from a larger pool, $D_{eval}$. The MIA is evaluated across all datasets in this test set, and is thus evaluated across the distribution of samples from $D_{eval}$. While this was a natural extension of ML evaluation to MIAs, recent work has shown that a record's risk heavily depends on its specific dataset. For example, outliers are particularly vulnerable, yet an outlier in one dataset may not be one in another. The sources of randomness currently used to evaluate MIAs may thus lead to inaccurate individual privacy risk estimates. We propose a new, specific evaluation setup for MIAs against ML models, using weight initialization as the sole source of randomness. This allows us to accurately evaluate the risk associated with the release of a model trained on a specific dataset. Using SOTA MIAs, we empirically show that the risk estimates given by the current setup lead to many records being misclassified as low risk. We derive theoretical results which, combined with empirical evidence, suggest that the risk calculated in the current setup is an average of the risks specific to each sampled dataset, validating our use of weight initialization as the only source of randomness. Finally, we consider an MIA with a stronger adversary leveraging information about the target dataset to infer membership. Taken together, our results show that current MIA evaluation is averaging the risk across datasets leading to inaccurate risk estimates, and the risk posed by attacks leveraging information about the target dataset to be potentially underestimated.

Mosaic Memory: Fuzzy Duplication in Copyright Traps for Large Language Models

The immense datasets used to develop Large Language Models (LLMs) often include copyright-protected content, typically without the content creator's consent. Copyright traps have been proposed to be injected into the original content, improving content detectability in newly released LLMs. Traps, however, rely on the exact duplication of a unique text sequence, leaving them vulnerable to commonly deployed data deduplication techniques. We here propose the generation of fuzzy copyright traps, featuring slight modifications across duplication. When injected in the fine-tuning data of a 1.3B LLM, we show fuzzy trap sequences to be memorized nearly as well as exact duplicates. Specifically, the Membership Inference Attack (MIA) ROC AUC only drops from 0.90 to 0.87 when 4 tokens are replaced across the fuzzy duplicates. We also find that selecting replacement positions to minimize the exact overlap between fuzzy duplicates leads to similar memorization, while making fuzzy duplicates highly unlikely to be removed by any deduplication process. Lastly, we argue that the fact that LLMs memorize across fuzzy duplicates challenges the study of LLM memorization relying on naturally occurring duplicates. Indeed, we find that the commonly used training dataset, The Pile, contains significant amounts of fuzzy duplicates. This introduces a previously unexplored confounding factor in post-hoc studies of LLM memorization, and questions the effectiveness of (exact) data deduplication as a privacy protection technique.

Re-pseudonymization Strategies for Smart Meter Data Are Not Robust to Deep Learning Profiling Attacks

Smart meters, devices measuring the electricity and gas consumption of a household, are currently being deployed at a fast rate throughout the world. The data they collect are extremely useful, including in the fight against climate change. However, these data and the information that can be inferred from them are highly sensitive. Re-pseudonymization, i.e., the frequent replacement of random identifiers over time, is widely used to share smart meter data while mitigating the risk of re-identification. We here show how, in spite of re-pseudonymization, households' consumption records can be pieced together with high accuracy in large-scale datasets. We propose the first deep learning-based profiling attack against re-pseudonymized smart meter data. Our attack combines neural network embeddings, which are used to extract features from weekly consumption records and are tailored to the smart meter identification task, with a nearest neighbor classifier. We evaluate six neural networks architectures as the embedding model. Our results suggest that the Transformer and CNN-LSTM architectures vastly outperform previous methods as well as other architectures, successfully identifying the correct household 73.4% of the time among 5139 households based on electricity and gas consumption records (54.5% for electricity only). We further show that the features extracted by the embedding model maintain their effectiveness when transferred to a set of users disjoint from the one used to train the model. Finally, we extensively evaluate the robustness of our results. Taken together, our results strongly suggest that even frequent re-pseudonymization strategies can be reversed, strongly limiting their ability to prevent re-identification in practice.

Copyright Traps for Large Language Models

Questions of fair use of copyright-protected content to train Large Language Models (LLMs) are being very actively debated. Document-level inference has been proposed as a new task: inferring from black-box access to the trained model whether a piece of content has been seen during training. SOTA methods however rely on naturally occurring memorization of (part of) the content. While very effective against models that memorize a lot, we hypothesize--and later confirm--that they will not work against models that do not naturally memorize, e.g. medium-size 1B models. We here propose to use copyright traps, the inclusion of fictitious entries in original content, to detect the use of copyrighted materials in LLMs with a focus on models where memorization does not naturally occur. We carefully design an experimental setup, randomly inserting traps into original content (books) and train a 1.3B LLM. We first validate that the use of content in our target model would be undetectable using existing methods. We then show, contrary to intuition, that even medium-length trap sentences repeated a significant number of times (100) are not detectable using existing methods. However, we show that longer sequences repeated a large number of times can be reliably detected (AUC=0.75) and used as copyright traps. We further improve these results by studying how the number of times a sequence is seen improves detectability, how sequences with higher perplexity tend to be memorized more, and how taking context into account further improves detectability.

Did the Neurons Read your Book? Document-level Membership Inference for Large Language Models

With large language models (LLMs) poised to become embedded in our daily lives, questions are starting to be raised about the dataset(s) they learned from. These questions range from potential bias or misinformation LLMs could retain from their training data to questions of copyright and fair use of human-generated text. However, while these questions emerge, developers of the recent state-of-the-art LLMs become increasingly reluctant to disclose details on their training corpus. We here introduce the task of document-level membership inference for real-world LLMs, i.e. inferring whether the LLM has seen a given document during training or not. First, we propose a procedure for the development and evaluation of document-level membership inference for LLMs by leveraging commonly used data sources for training and the model release date. We then propose a practical, black-box method to predict document-level membership and instantiate it on OpenLLaMA-7B with both books and academic papers. We show our methodology to perform very well, reaching an impressive AUC of 0.856 for books and 0.678 for papers. We then show our approach to outperform the sentence-level membership inference attacks used in the privacy literature for the document-level membership task. We finally evaluate whether smaller models might be less sensitive to document-level inference and show OpenLLaMA-3B to be approximately as sensitive as OpenLLaMA-7B to our approach. Taken together, our results show that accurate document-level membership can be inferred for LLMs, increasing the transparency of technology poised to change our lives.