Papers › Poisoning Attacks and Defenses in Recommender Systems: A Survey
Poisoning Attacks and Defenses in Recommender Systems: A Survey
Zongwei Wang, Junliang Yu, Min Gao, Wei Yuan, Guanhua Ye, Shazia Sadiq, Hongzhi Yin
Modern recommender systems (RS) have profoundly enhanced user experience across digital platforms, yet they face significant threats from poisoning attacks. These attacks, aimed at manipulating recommendation outputs for unethical gains, exploit vulnerabilities in RS through injecting malicious data or intervening model training. This survey presents a unique perspective by examining these threats through the lens of an attacker, offering fresh insights into their mechanics and impacts. Concretely, we detail a systematic pipeline that encompasses four stages of a poisoning attack: setting attack goals, assessing attacker capabilities, analyzing victim architecture, and implementing poisoning strategies. The pipeline not only aligns with various attack tactics but also serves as a comprehensive taxonomy to pinpoint focuses of distinct poisoning attacks. Correspondingly, we further classify defensive strategies into two main categories: poisoning data filtering and robust training from the defender's perspective. Finally, we highlight existing limitations and suggest innovative directions for further exploration in this field.
In Syntology View this paper on Syntology: its repositories, every harvested function with whether it ran, its licence and the call to fetch it.
Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
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.
Tasks
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