Papers › A Duty to Forget, a Right to be Assured? Exposing Vulnerabilities in Machine...
A Duty to Forget, a Right to be Assured? Exposing Vulnerabilities in Machine Unlearning Services
Hongsheng Hu, Shuo Wang, Jiamin Chang, Haonan Zhong, Ruoxi Sun, Shuang Hao, Haojin Zhu, Minhui Xue
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
The right to be forgotten requires the removal or "unlearning" of a user's data from machine learning models. However, in the context of Machine Learning as a Service (MLaaS), retraining a model from scratch to fulfill the unlearning request is impractical due to the lack of training data on the service provider's side (the server). Furthermore, approximate unlearning further embraces a complex trade-off between utility (model performance) and privacy (unlearning performance). In this paper, we try to explore the potential threats posed by unlearning services in MLaaS, specifically over-unlearning, where more information is unlearned than expected. We propose two strategies that leverage over-unlearning to measure the impact on the trade-off balancing, under black-box access settings, in which the existing machine unlearning attacks are not applicable. The effectiveness of these strategies is evaluated through extensive experiments on benchmark datasets, across various model architectures and representative unlearning approaches. Results indicate significant potential for both strategies to undermine model efficacy in unlearning scenarios. This study uncovers an underexplored gap between unlearning and contemporary MLaaS, highlighting the need for careful considerations in balancing data unlearning, model utility, and security.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2309.08230")
Code
Syntology Ran 3 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 0 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 3 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: official repository: 3 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
3 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 3 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from tasi-lab/over-unlearning. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
6aac7cb910311018 · report
0016f6d3f0df1d2a · report
2b780c853e5fc7ef · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections