Papers › Locality-Sensitive Hashing Does Not Guarantee Privacy! Attacks on Google's FLoC and...

Locality-Sensitive Hashing Does Not Guarantee Privacy! Attacks on Google's FLoC and the MinHash Hierarchy System

27 Feb 2023arXiv:2302.13635links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Florian Turati, Carlos Cotrini, Karel Kubicek, David Basin

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.

Recently proposed systems aim at achieving privacy using locality-sensitive hashing. We show how these approaches fail by presenting attacks against two such systems: Google's FLoC proposal for privacy-preserving targeted advertising and the MinHash Hierarchy, a system for processing mobile users' traffic behavior in a privacy-preserving way. Our attacks refute the pre-image resistance, anonymity, and privacy guarantees claimed for these systems. In the case of FLoC, we show how to deanonymize users using Sybil attacks and to reconstruct 10% or more of the browsing history for 30% of its users using Generative Adversarial Networks. We achieve this only analyzing the hashes used by FLoC. For MinHash, we precisely identify the movement of a subset of individuals and, on average, we can limit users' movement to just 10% of the possible geographic area, again using just the hashes. In addition, we refute their differential privacy claims.

PaperPDFCode

Code

privacy-lsh/floc-minhash officialmentioned in paper report

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

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

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