Search Results for « Adversarial Machine Learning »

This NIST AI report develops a taxonomy of concepts and defines terminology in the field of adversarial machine learning (AML). The taxonomy is built on survey of the AML literature and is arranged in a conceptual hierarchy that includes key types of ML methods and lifecycle stage of attack, attacker goals and objectives, and attacker capabilities and knowledge of the learning process. The report also provides corresponding methods for mitigating and managing the consequences of attacks and points out relevant open challenges to take into account in the lifecycle of AI systems. The terminology used in the report is consistent with the literature on AML and is complemented by a glossary that defines key terms associated with the security of AI systems and is intended to assist non-expert readers. Taken together, the taxonomy and terminology are meant to inform other standards and future practice guides for assessing and managing the security of AI systems, by establishing a common language and understanding of the rapidly developing AML landscape.

Adversarial examples are malicious inputs designed to fool machine learning models. They often transfer from one model to another, allowing attackers to mount black box attacks without knowledge of the target model's parameters. Adversarial training is the process of explicitly training a model on adversarial examples, in order to make it more robust to attack or to reduce its test error on clean inputs. So far, adversarial training has primarily been applied to small problems. In this research, we apply adversarial training to ImageNet. Our contributions include: (1) recommendations for how to succesfully scale adversarial training to large models and datasets, (2) the observation that adversarial training confers robustness to single-step attack methods, (3) the finding that multi-step attack methods are somewhat less transferable than single-step attack methods, so single-step attacks are the best for mounting black-box attacks, and (4) resolution of a "label leaking" effect that causes adversarially trained models to perform better on adversarial examples than on clean examples, because the adversarial example construction process uses the true label and the model can learn to exploit regularities in the construction process.

Based on interviews with 28 organizations, we found that industry practitioners are not equipped with tactical and strategic tools to protect, detect and respond to attacks on their Machine Learning (ML) systems. We leverage the insights from the interviews and enumerate the gaps in securing machine learning systems when viewed in the context of traditional software security development. We write this paper from the perspective of two personas: developers/ML engineers and security incident responders. The goal of this paper is to layout the research agenda to amend the Security Development Lifecycle for industrial-grade software in the adversarial ML era.

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately.Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by NIST, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose.There may be references in this publication to other publications currently under development by NIST in accordance with its assigned statutory responsibilities.The information in this publication, including concepts and methodologies, may be used by federal agencies even before the completion of such companion publications.Thus, until each publication is completed, current requirements, guidelines, and procedures, where they exist, remain operative.For planning and transition purposes, federal agencies may wish to closely follow the development of these new publications by NIST.

Cyber-security is the practice of protecting computing systems and networks from digital attacks, which are a rising concern in the Information Age. With the growing pace at which new attacks are developed, conventional signature based attack detection methods are often not enough, and machine learning poses as a potential solution. Adversarial machine learning is a research area that examines both the generation and detection of adversarial examples, which are inputs specially crafted to deceive classifiers, and has been extensively studied specifically in the area of image recognition, where minor modifications are performed on images that cause a classifier to produce incorrect predictions. However, in other fields, such as intrusion and malware detection, the exploration of such methods is still growing. The aim of this survey is to explore works that apply adversarial machine learning concepts to intrusion and malware detection scenarios. We concluded that a wide variety of attacks were tested and proven effective in malware and intrusion detection, although their practicality was not tested in intrusion scenarios. Adversarial defenses were substantially less explored, although their effectiveness was also proven at resisting adversarial attacks. We also concluded that, contrarily to malware scenarios, the variety of datasets in intrusion scenarios is still very small, with the most used dataset being greatly outdated.

The changing nature of warfare has seen a paradigm shift from the conventional to asymmetric, contactless warfare such as information and cyber warfare. Excessive dependence on information and communication technologies, cloud infrastructures, big data analytics, data-mining and automation in decision making poses grave threats to business and economy in adversarial environments. Adversarial machine learning is a fast growing area of research which studies the design of Machine Learning algorithms that are robust in adversarial environments. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of this emerging area and the various techniques of adversary modelling. We explore the threat models for Machine Learning systems and describe the various techniques to attack and defend them. We present privacy issues in these models and describe a cyber-warfare test-bed to test the effectiveness of the various attack-defence strategies and conclude with some open problems in this area of research.