More Like this

1. DuetSGX: Differential Privacy with Secure Hardware

   Nguyen, Phillip; Silence, Alex; Darais, David; Near, Joseph P (January 2020, Workshop on Theory and Practice of Differential Privacy (TPDP))

   null (Ed.)

   Differential privacy offers a formal privacy guarantee for individuals, but many deployments of differentially private systems require a trusted third party (the data curator). We propose DuetSGX, a system that uses secure hardware (Intel’s SGX) to eliminate the need for a trusted data curator. Data owners submit encrypted data that can be decrypted only within a secure enclave running the DuetSGX system, ensuring that sensitive data is never available to the data curator. Analysts submit queries written in the Duet language, which is specifically designed for verifying that programs satisfy differential privacy; DuetSGX uses the Duet typechecker to verify that each query satisfies differential privacy before running it. DuetSGX therefore provides the benefits of local differential privacy and central differential privacy simultaneously: noise is only added to final results, and there is no trusted third party. We have implemented a proof-of-concept implementation of DuetSGX and we release it as open-source. 

   more » « less
2. "I need a better description": An Investigation Into User Expectations For Differential Privacy

   https://doi.org/10.29012/jpc.813  

   Cummings, Rachel; Kaptchuk, Gabriel; Redmiles, Elissa (August 2023, Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality)

   Despite recent widespread deployment of differential privacy, relatively little is known about what users think of differential privacy. In this work, we seek to explore users' privacy expectations related to differential privacy. Specifically, we investigate (1) whether users care about the protections afforded by differential privacy, and (2) whether they are therefore more willing to share their data with differentially private systems. Further, we attempt to understand (3) users' privacy expectations of the differentially private systems they may encounter in practice and (4) their willingness to share data in such systems. To answer these questions, we use a series of rigorously conducted surveys (n=2424).   We find that users care about the kinds of information leaks against which differential privacy protects and are more willing to share their private information when the risks of these leaks are less likely to happen.  Additionally, we find that the ways in which differential privacy is described in-the-wild haphazardly set users' privacy expectations, which can be misleading depending on the deployment. We synthesize our results into a framework for understanding a user's willingness to share information with differentially private systems, which takes into account the interaction between the user's prior privacy concerns and how differential privacy is described. 

   more » « less
3. Manipulation Attacks in Local Differential Privacy

   https://doi.org/10.29012/jpc.754  

   Cheu, Albert; Smith, Adam; Ullman, Jonathan (February 2021, Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality)

   Local differential privacy is a widely studied restriction on distributed algorithms that collect aggregates about sensitive user data, and is now deployed in several large systems. We initiate a systematic study of a fundamental limitation of locally differentially private protocols: they are highly vulnerable to adversarial manipulation. While any algorithm can be manipulated by adversaries who lie about their inputs, we show that any noninteractive locally differentially private protocol can be manipulated to a much greater extent---when the privacy level is high, or the domain size is large, a small fraction of users in the protocol can completely obscure the distribution of the honest users' input. We also construct protocols that are optimally robust to manipulation for a variety of common tasks in local differential privacy. Finally, we give simple experiments validating our  theoretical results, and demonstrating that protocols that are optimal without manipulation can have dramatically different levels of robustness to manipulation. Our results suggest caution when deploying local differential privacy and reinforce the importance of efficient cryptographic  techniques for the distributed emulation of centrally differentially private mechanisms. 

   more » « less
4. Profile Based Privacy for Locally Private Computations

   Geumlek, J and (July 2019, Abstracts of papers - IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory)

   Differential privacy has emerged as a gold standard in privacy-preserving data analysis. A popular variant is local differential privacy, where the data holder is the trusted curator. A major barrier, however, towards a wider adoption of this model is that it offers a poor privacy-utility tradeoff. In this work, we address this problem by introducing a new variant of local privacy called profile-based privacy. The central idea is that the problem setting comes with a graph G of data generating distributions, whose edges encode sensitive pairs of distributions that should be made indistinguishable. This provides higher utility because unlike local differential privacy, we no longer need to make every pair of private values in the domain indistinguishable, and instead only protect the identity of the underlying distribution. We establish privacy properties of the profile-based privacy definition, such as post-processing invariance and graceful composition. Finally, we provide mechanisms that are private in this framework, and show via simulations that they achieve higher utility than the corresponding local differential privacy mechanisms. 

   more » « less
5. Triangle Counting with Local Edge Differential Privacy

   https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.ICALP.2023.52  

   Eden, Talya; Liu, Quanquan C.; Raskhodnikova, Sofya; Smith, Adam (January 2023, Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs):50th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2023))

   Etessami, Kousha; Feige, Uriel; Puppis, Gabriele (Ed.)

   Many deployments of differential privacy in industry are in the local model, where each party releases its private information via a differentially private randomizer. We study triangle counting in the noninteractive and interactive local model with edge differential privacy (that, intuitively, requires that the outputs of the algorithm on graphs that differ in one edge be indistinguishable). In this model, each party’s local view consists of the adjacency list of one vertex. In the noninteractive model, we prove that additive Ω(n²) error is necessary, where n is the number of nodes. This lower bound is our main technical contribution. It uses a reconstruction attack with a new class of linear queries and a novel mix-and-match strategy of running the local randomizers with different completions of their adjacency lists. It matches the additive error of the algorithm based on Randomized Response, proposed by Imola, Murakami and Chaudhuri (USENIX2021) and analyzed by Imola, Murakami and Chaudhuri (CCS2022) for constant ε. We use a different postprocessing of Randomized Response and provide tight bounds on the variance of the resulting algorithm. In the interactive setting, we prove a lower bound of Ω(n^{3/2}) on the additive error. Previously, no hardness results were known for interactive, edge-private algorithms in the local model, except for those that follow trivially from the results for the central model. Our work significantly improves on the state of the art in differentially private graph analysis in the local model. 

   more » « less