Machine Learning needs its own Randomness Standard: Randomised Smoothing and PRNG-based attacks
AI-generated Key Points
- Randomness plays a crucial role in machine learning (ML) in various aspects
- Poor randomness can be exploited by attackers to compromise ML systems
- Randomised Smoothing is a popular approach for training robust models and certifying input datapoints
- The paper introduces a novel attack against Randomised Smoothing by manipulating supplied randomness
- Attacks can falsely certify an overestimate or underestimate of robustness with minimal changes to randomness
- The attack can be hidden in the random number generator and is difficult to detect using NIST tests
- NIST guidelines on random number testing need updating for safety-critical and security-critical ML applications
- Importance of considering vulnerabilities associated with randomness in ML systems
- Need for improving random number generation techniques for better security in ML applications.
Authors: Pranav Dahiya, Ilia Shumailov, Ross Anderson
Abstract: Randomness supports many critical functions in the field of machine learning (ML) including optimisation, data selection, privacy, and security. ML systems outsource the task of generating or harvesting randomness to the compiler, the cloud service provider or elsewhere in the toolchain. Yet there is a long history of attackers exploiting poor randomness, or even creating it -- as when the NSA put backdoors in random number generators to break cryptography. In this paper we consider whether attackers can compromise an ML system using only the randomness on which they commonly rely. We focus our effort on Randomised Smoothing, a popular approach to train certifiably robust models, and to certify specific input datapoints of an arbitrary model. We choose Randomised Smoothing since it is used for both security and safety -- to counteract adversarial examples and quantify uncertainty respectively. Under the hood, it relies on sampling Gaussian noise to explore the volume around a data point to certify that a model is not vulnerable to adversarial examples. We demonstrate an entirely novel attack against it, where an attacker backdoors the supplied randomness to falsely certify either an overestimate or an underestimate of robustness. We demonstrate that such attacks are possible, that they require very small changes to randomness to succeed, and that they can be hard to detect. As an example, we hide an attack in the random number generator and show that the randomness tests suggested by NIST fail to detect it. We advocate updating the NIST guidelines on random number testing to make them more appropriate for safety-critical and security-critical machine-learning applications.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Score: 0
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through a
tree representationLook for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.