On Distributed Differential Privacy and Counting Distinct Elements
September 21, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Information Technology Convergence and Services
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Lijie Chen, Badih Ghazi, Ravi Kumar, Pasin Manurangsi
arXiv ID
2009.09604
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
cs.DS,
cs.LG,
stat.ML
Citations
33
Venue
Information Technology Convergence and Services
Last Checked
6 months ago
Abstract
We study the setup where each of $n$ users holds an element from a discrete set, and the goal is to count the number of distinct elements across all users, under the constraint of $(Ξ΅, Ξ΄)$-differentially privacy: - In the non-interactive local setting, we prove that the additive error of any protocol is $Ξ©(n)$ for any constant $Ξ΅$ and for any $Ξ΄$ inverse polynomial in $n$. - In the single-message shuffle setting, we prove a lower bound of $Ξ©(n)$ on the error for any constant $Ξ΅$ and for some $Ξ΄$ inverse quasi-polynomial in $n$. We do so by building on the moment-matching method from the literature on distribution estimation. - In the multi-message shuffle setting, we give a protocol with at most one message per user in expectation and with an error of $\tilde{O}(\sqrt(n))$ for any constant $Ξ΅$ and for any $Ξ΄$ inverse polynomial in $n$. Our protocol is also robustly shuffle private, and our error of $\sqrt(n)$ matches a known lower bound for such protocols. Our proof technique relies on a new notion, that we call dominated protocols, and which can also be used to obtain the first non-trivial lower bounds against multi-message shuffle protocols for the well-studied problems of selection and learning parity. Our first lower bound for estimating the number of distinct elements provides the first $Ο(\sqrt(n))$ separation between global sensitivity and error in local differential privacy, thus answering an open question of Vadhan (2017). We also provide a simple construction that gives $\tildeΞ©(n)$ separation between global sensitivity and error in two-party differential privacy, thereby answering an open question of McGregor et al. (2011).
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted