Reviewing and Improving the Gaussian Mechanism for Differential Privacy

November 27, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Jun Zhao, Teng Wang, Tao Bai, Kwok-Yan Lam, Zhiying Xu, Shuyu Shi, Xuebin Ren, Xinyu Yang, Yang Liu, Han Yu arXiv ID 1911.12060 Category cs.CR: Cryptography & Security Cross-listed cs.AI, cs.CY, cs.DB, cs.LG Citations 35 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 6 months ago
Abstract
Differential privacy provides a rigorous framework to quantify data privacy, and has received considerable interest recently. A randomized mechanism satisfying $(Ξ΅, Ξ΄)$-differential privacy (DP) roughly means that, except with a small probability $Ξ΄$, altering a record in a dataset cannot change the probability that an output is seen by more than a multiplicative factor $e^Ξ΅ $. A well-known solution to $(Ξ΅, Ξ΄)$-DP is the Gaussian mechanism initiated by Dwork et al. [1] in 2006 with an improvement by Dwork and Roth [2] in 2014, where a Gaussian noise amount $\sqrt{2\ln \frac{2}Ξ΄} \times \fracΔΡ$ of [1] or $\sqrt{2\ln \frac{1.25}Ξ΄} \times \fracΔΡ$ of [2] is added independently to each dimension of the query result, for a query with $\ell_2$-sensitivity $Ξ”$. Although both classical Gaussian mechanisms [1,2] assume $0 < Ξ΅\leq 1$, our review finds that many studies in the literature have used the classical Gaussian mechanisms under values of $Ξ΅$ and $Ξ΄$ where the added noise amounts of [1,2] do not achieve $(Ξ΅,Ξ΄)$-DP. We obtain such result by analyzing the optimal noise amount $Οƒ_{DP-OPT}$ for $(Ξ΅,Ξ΄)$-DP and identifying $Ξ΅$ and $Ξ΄$ where the noise amounts of classical mechanisms are even less than $Οƒ_{DP-OPT}$. Since $Οƒ_{DP-OPT}$ has no closed-form expression and needs to be approximated in an iterative manner, we propose Gaussian mechanisms by deriving closed-form upper bounds for $Οƒ_{DP-OPT}$. Our mechanisms achieve $(Ξ΅,Ξ΄)$-DP for any $Ξ΅$, while the classical mechanisms [1,2] do not achieve $(Ξ΅,Ξ΄)$-DP for large $Ξ΅$ given $Ξ΄$. Moreover, the utilities of our mechanisms improve those of [1,2] and are close to that of the optimal yet more computationally expensive Gaussian mechanism.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Cryptography & Security

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted