Papers › Reconstruction Attacks on Aggressive Relaxations of Differential Privacy

Reconstruction Attacks on Aggressive Relaxations of Differential Privacy

8 Sep 2022arXiv:2209.03905links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Prottay Protivash, John Durrell, Zeyu Ding, Danfeng Zhang, Daniel Kifer

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.

Differential privacy is a widely accepted formal privacy definition that allows aggregate information about a dataset to be released while controlling privacy leakage for individuals whose records appear in the data. Due to the unavoidable tension between privacy and utility, there have been many works trying to relax the requirements of differential privacy to achieve greater utility. One class of relaxation, which is starting to gain support outside the privacy community is embodied by the definitions of individual differential privacy (IDP) and bootstrap differential privacy (BDP). The original version of differential privacy defines a set of neighboring database pairs and achieves its privacy guarantees by requiring that each pair of neighbors should be nearly indistinguishable to an attacker. The privacy definitions we study, however, aggressively reduce the set of neighboring pairs that are protected. Both IDP and BDP define a measure of "privacy loss" that satisfies formal privacy properties such as postprocessing invariance and composition, and achieve dramatically better utility than the traditional variants of differential privacy. However, there is a significant downside - we show that they allow a significant portion of the dataset to be reconstructed using algorithms that have arbitrarily low privacy loss under their privacy accounting rules. We demonstrate these attacks using the preferred mechanisms of these privacy definitions. In particular, we design a set of queries that, when protected by these mechanisms with high noise settings (i.e., with claims of very low privacy loss), yield more precise information about the dataset than if they were not protected at all.

PaperPDFCode

Code

cmla-psu/idpreconstruction 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