Search

Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) is a popular method for training machine learning models with formal Differential Privacy (DP) guarantees. As DP-SGD processes the training data in batches, it uses Poisson sub-sampling to select batches at each step. However, due to computational and compatibility benefits, replacing sub-sampling with shuffling has become common practice. Yet, since tight theoretical guarantees for shuffling are currently unknown, prior work using shuffling reports DP guarantees as though Poisson sub-sampling was used. This prompts the need to verify whether this discrepancy is reflected in a gap between the theoretical guarantees from state-of-the-art models and the actual privacy leakage. To do so, we introduce a novel DP auditing procedure to analyze DP-SGD with shuffling. We show that state-of-the-art DP models trained with shuffling appreciably overestimated privacy guarantees (up to 4x). In the process, we assess the impact of several parameters, such as batch size, privacy budget, and threat model, on privacy leakage. Finally, we study two variations of the shuffling procedure found in the wild, which result in further privacy leakage. Overall, our work empirically attests to the risk of using shuffling instead of Poisson sub-sampling vis-\`a-vis the actual privacy leakage of DP-SGD.

Online social media platforms significantly influence public debates by shaping the information users encounter. Content visibility on these platforms is regulated by recommendation algorithms designed to maximize user engagement using individual-level data, including personal preferences and interactions. These algorithms play a crucial role in information dissemination, yet their inner workings are often undisclosed, raising concerns about potential manipulation of visibility. While algorithms may be intended to limit the spread of harmful content, they can also be exploited to suppress dissenting voices without users' awareness. The suspicion that platforms deliberately reduce the visibility of certain users or content - commonly known as shadow banning - has garnered significant public attention, with numerous figures advocating for greater transparency around this practice. In this study, we perform a quantitative study geared to identify suspicious changes in content visibility on Twitter (now known as X). We build and study a dataset of over 13 million tweets from more than 5 million users discussing the Ukraine conflict, including each tweet's number of views and metadata, aiming to detect reduced or inflated visibility patterns. We investigate how visibility correlates with factors such as authors' stance, role, interaction networks, and content narratives. Our findings reveal significant variations in visibility, likely driven by algorithmic interventions. These results highlight the need for greater transparency in regulating online information ecosystems to prevent algorithmic manipulation that could undermine public discourse and the fairness of debates.

Synthetic data created by differentially private (DP) generative models is increasingly used in real-world settings. In this context, PATE-GAN has emerged as a popular algorithm, combining Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) with the private training approach of PATE (Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles). In this paper, we analyze and benchmark six open-source PATE-GAN implementations, including three by (a subset of) the original authors. First, we shed light on architecture deviations and empirically demonstrate that none replicate the utility performance reported in the original paper. Then, we present an in-depth privacy evaluation, including DP auditing, showing that all implementations leak more privacy than intended and uncovering 17 privacy violations and 5 other bugs. Our codebase is available from https://github.com/spalabucr/pategan-audit.

Federated Learning (FL) has emerged as a solution for distributed systems that allow clients to train models on their data and only share models instead of local data. Generative Models are designed to learn the distribution of a dataset and generate new data samples that are similar to the original data. Many prior works have tried proposing Federated Generative Models. Using Federated Learning and Generative Models together can be susceptible to attacks, and designing the optimal architecture remains challenging. This survey covers the growing interest in the intersection of FL and Generative Models by comprehensively reviewing research conducted from 2019 to 2024. We systematically compare nearly 100 papers, focusing on their FL and Generative Model methods and privacy considerations. To make this field more accessible to newcomers, we highlight the state-of-the-art advancements and identify unresolved challenges, offering insights for future research in this evolving field., Comment: 24 Pages, 3 Figures, 5 Tables

This paper presents an auditing procedure for the Differentially Private Stochastic Gradient Descent (DP-SGD) algorithm in the black-box threat model that is substantially tighter than prior work. The main intuition is to craft worst-case initial model parameters, as DP-SGD's privacy analysis is agnostic to the choice of the initial model parameters. For models trained on MNIST and CIFAR-10 at theoretical $\varepsilon=10.0$, our auditing procedure yields empirical estimates of $\varepsilon_{emp} = 7.21$ and $6.95$, respectively, on a 1,000-record sample and $\varepsilon_{emp}= 6.48$ and $4.96$ on the full datasets. By contrast, previous audits were only (relatively) tight in stronger white-box models, where the adversary can access the model's inner parameters and insert arbitrary gradients. Overall, our auditing procedure can offer valuable insight into how the privacy analysis of DP-SGD could be improved and detect bugs and DP violations in real-world implementations. The source code needed to reproduce our experiments is available at https://github.com/spalabucr/bb-audit-dpsgd., Comment: To appear in the Proceedings of the Thirty-eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS 2024). Please cite accordingly

Differentially private synthetic data generation (DP-SDG) algorithms are used to release datasets that are structurally and statistically similar to sensitive data while providing formal bounds on the information they leak. However, bugs in algorithms and implementations may cause the actual information leakage to be higher. This prompts the need to verify whether the theoretical guarantees of state-of-the-art DP-SDG implementations also hold in practice. We do so via a rigorous auditing process: we compute the information leakage via an adversary playing a distinguishing game and running membership inference attacks (MIAs). If the leakage observed empirically is higher than the theoretical bounds, we identify a DP violation; if it is non-negligibly lower, the audit is loose. We audit six DP-SDG implementations using different datasets and threat models and find that black-box MIAs commonly used against DP-SDGs are severely limited in power, yielding remarkably loose empirical privacy estimates. We then consider MIAs in stronger threat models, i.e., passive and active white-box, using both existing and newly proposed attacks. Overall, we find that, currently, we do not only need white-box MIAs but also worst-case datasets to tightly estimate the privacy leakage from DP-SDGs. Finally, we show that our automated auditing procedure finds both known DP violations (in 4 out of the 6 implementations) as well as a new one in the DPWGAN implementation that was successfully submitted to the NIST DP Synthetic Data Challenge. The source code needed to reproduce our experiments is available from https://github.com/spalabucr/synth-audit., Comment: To appear at Usenix Security 2024

Online web communities often face bans for violating platform policies, encouraging their migration to alternative platforms. This migration, however, can result in increased toxicity and unforeseen consequences on the new platform. In recent years, researchers have collected data from many alternative platforms, indicating coordinated efforts leading to offline events, conspiracy movements, hate speech propagation, and harassment. Thus, it becomes crucial to characterize and understand these alternative platforms. To advance research in this direction, we collect and release a large-scale dataset from Scored -- an alternative Reddit platform that sheltered banned fringe communities, for example, c/TheDonald (a prominent right-wing community) and c/GreatAwakening (a conspiratorial community). Over four years, we collected approximately 57M posts from Scored, with at least 58 communities identified as migrating from Reddit and over 950 communities created since the platform's inception. Furthermore, we provide sentence embeddings of all posts in our dataset, generated through a state-of-the-art model, to further advance the field in characterizing the discussions within these communities. We aim to provide these resources to facilitate their investigations without the need for extensive data collection and processing efforts.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought about an extraordinary rate of scientific papers on the topic that were discussed among the general public, although often in biased or misinformed ways. In this paper, we present a mixed-methods analysis aimed at examining whether public discussions were commensurate with the scientific consensus on several COVID-19 issues. We estimate scientific consensus based on samples of abstracts from preprint servers and compare against the volume of public discussions on Twitter mentioning these papers. We find that anti-consensus posts and users, though overall less numerous than pro-consensus ones, are vastly over-represented on Twitter, thus producing a false consensus effect. This transpires with favorable papers being disproportionately amplified, along with an influx of new anti-consensus user sign-ups. Finally, our content analysis highlights that anti-consensus users misrepresent scientific findings or question scientists' integrity in their efforts to substantiate their claims., Comment: Accepted for publication at 27th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (ACM CSCW 2024). Please cite accordingly

This paper presents a large-scale analysis of the cryptocurrency community on Reddit, shedding light on the intricate relationship between the evolution of their activity, emotional dynamics, and price movements. We analyze over 130M posts on 122 cryptocurrency-related subreddits using temporal analysis, statistical modeling, and emotion detection. While /r/CryptoCurrency and /r/dogecoin are the most active subreddits, we find an overall surge in cryptocurrency-related activity in 2021, followed by a sharp decline. We also uncover a strong relationship in terms of cross-correlation between online activity and the price of various coins, with the changes in the number of posts mostly leading the price changes. Backtesting analysis shows that a straightforward strategy based on the cross-correlation where one buys/sells a coin if the daily number of posts about it is greater/less than the previous would have led to a 3x return on investment. Finally, we shed light on the emotional dynamics of the cryptocurrency communities, finding that joy becomes a prominent indicator during upward market performance, while a decline in the market manifests an increase in anger.

Generative models producing synthetic data are meant to provide a privacy-friendly approach to releasing data. However, their privacy guarantees are only considered robust when models satisfy Differential Privacy (DP). Alas, this is not a ubiquitous standard, as many leading companies (and, in fact, research papers) use ad-hoc privacy metrics based on testing the statistical similarity between synthetic and real data. In this paper, we examine the privacy metrics used in real-world synthetic data deployments and demonstrate their unreliability in several ways. First, we provide counter-examples where severe privacy violations occur even if the privacy tests pass and instantiate accurate membership and attribute inference attacks with minimal cost. We then introduce ReconSyn, a reconstruction attack that generates multiple synthetic datasets that are considered private by the metrics but actually leak information unique to individual records. We show that ReconSyn recovers 78-100% of the outliers in the train data with only black-box access to a single fitted generative model and the privacy metrics. In the process, we show that applying DP only to the model does not mitigate this attack, as using privacy metrics breaks the end-to-end DP pipeline.

Alas, coordinated hate attacks, or raids, are becoming increasingly common online. In a nutshell, these are perpetrated by a group of aggressors who organize and coordinate operations on a platform (e.g., 4chan) to target victims on another community (e.g., YouTube). In this paper, we focus on attributing raids to their source community, paving the way for moderation approaches that take the context (and potentially the motivation) of an attack into consideration. We present TUBERAIDER, an attribution system achieving over 75% accuracy in detecting and attributing coordinated hate attacks on YouTube videos. We instantiate it using links to YouTube videos shared on 4chan's /pol/ board, r/The_Donald, and 16 Incels-related subreddits. We use a peak detector to identify a rise in the comment activity of a YouTube video, which signals that an attack may be occurring. We then train a machine learning classifier based on the community language (i.e., TF-IDF scores of relevant keywords) to perform the attribution. We test TUBERAIDER in the wild and present a few case studies of actual aggression attacks identified by it to showcase its effectiveness., Comment: Accepted for publication at the 18th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (ICWSM 2024). Please cite accordingly

Generative models trained with Differential Privacy (DP) can produce synthetic data while reducing privacy risks. However, navigating their privacy-utility tradeoffs makes finding the best models for specific settings/tasks challenging. This paper bridges this gap by profiling how DP generative models for tabular data distribute privacy budgets across rows and columns, which is one of the primary sources of utility degradation. We compare graphical and deep generative models, focusing on the key factors contributing to how privacy budgets are spent, i.e., underlying modeling techniques, DP mechanisms, and data dimensionality. Through our measurement study, we shed light on the characteristics that make different models suitable for various settings and tasks. For instance, we find that graphical models distribute privacy budgets horizontally and thus cannot handle relatively wide datasets for a fixed training time; also, the performance on the task they were optimized for monotonically increases with more data but could also overfit. Deep generative models spend their budgets per iteration, so their behavior is less predictable with varying dataset dimensions, but are more flexible as they could perform better if trained on more features. Moreover, low levels of privacy ($\epsilon\geq100$) could help some models generalize, achieving better results than without applying DP. We believe our work will aid the deployment of DP synthetic data techniques by navigating through the best candidate models vis-a-vis the dataset features, desired privacy levels, and downstream tasks., Comment: A shorter version of this paper appears in the Proceedings of the 31st ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (ACM CCS 2024). This is the full version

Federated learning (FL) enables multiple parties to collaboratively train a machine learning model without sharing their data; rather, they train their own model locally and send updates to a central server for aggregation. Depending on how the data is distributed among the participants, FL can be classified into Horizontal (HFL) and Vertical (VFL). In VFL, the participants share the same set of training instances but only host a different and non-overlapping subset of the whole feature space. Whereas in HFL, each participant shares the same set of features while the training set is split into locally owned training data subsets. VFL is increasingly used in applications like financial fraud detection; nonetheless, very little work has analyzed its security. In this paper, we focus on robustness in VFL, in particular, on backdoor attacks, whereby an adversary attempts to manipulate the aggregate model during the training process to trigger misclassifications. Performing backdoor attacks in VFL is more challenging than in HFL, as the adversary i) does not have access to the labels during training and ii) cannot change the labels as she only has access to the feature embeddings. We present a first-of-its-kind clean-label backdoor attack in VFL, which consists of two phases: a label inference and a backdoor phase. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the attack on three different datasets, investigate the factors involved in its success, and discuss countermeasures to mitigate its impact., Comment: Accepted for publication at the 45th IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy (S&P 2024). Please cite accordingly

The Internet has been instrumental in connecting under-represented and vulnerable groups of people. Platforms built to foster social interaction and engagement have enabled historically disenfranchised groups to have a voice. One such vulnerable group is women. In this paper, we explore the diversity in online women's ideological spaces using a multi-dimensional approach. We perform a large-scale, data-driven analysis of over 6M Reddit comments and submissions from 14 subreddits. We elicit a diverse taxonomy of online women's ideological spaces, ranging from counterparts to the so-called Manosphere to Gender-Critical Feminism. We then perform content analysis, finding meaningful differences across topics and communities. Finally, we shed light on two platforms, ovarit.com and thepinkpill.co, where two toxic communities of online women's ideological spaces (Gender-Critical Feminism and Femcels) migrated after their ban on Reddit.

Sharing data can often enable compelling applications and analytics. However, more often than not, valuable datasets contain information of a sensitive nature, and thus, sharing them can endanger the privacy of users and organizations. A possible alternative gaining momentum in both the research community and industry is to share synthetic data instead. The idea is to release artificially generated datasets that resemble the actual data -- more precisely, having similar statistical properties. In this article, we provide a gentle introduction to synthetic data and discuss its use cases, the privacy challenges that are still unaddressed, and its inherent limitations as an effective privacy-enhancing technology., Comment: To Appear in IEEE Security and Privacy Magazine

To curb the problem of false information, social media platforms like Twitter started adding warning labels to content discussing debunked narratives, with the goal of providing more context to their audiences. Unfortunately, these labels are not applied uniformly and leave large amounts of false content unmoderated. This paper presents LAMBRETTA, a system that automatically identifies tweets that are candidates for soft moderation using Learning To Rank (LTR). We run LAMBRETTA on Twitter data to moderate false claims related to the 2020 US Election and find that it flags over 20 times more tweets than Twitter, with only 3.93% false positives and 18.81% false negatives, outperforming alternative state-of-the-art methods based on keyword extraction and semantic search. Overall, LAMBRETTA assists human moderators in identifying and flagging false information on social media., Comment: 44th IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy (S&P 2023)

Previous research has documented the existence of both online echo chambers and hostile intergroup interactions. In this paper, we explore the relationship between these two phenomena by studying the activity of 5.97M Reddit users and 421M comments posted over 13 years. We examine whether users who are more engaged in echo chambers are more hostile when they comment on other communities. We then create a typology of relationships between political communities based on whether their users are toxic to each other, whether echo chamber-like engagement with these communities is associated with polarization, and on the communities' political leanings. We observe both the echo chamber and hostile intergroup interaction phenomena, but neither holds universally across communities. Contrary to popular belief, we find that polarizing and toxic speech is more dominant between communities on the same, rather than opposing, sides of the political spectrum, especially on the left; however, this mainly points to the collective targeting of political outgroups.

Modern defenses against cyberattacks increasingly rely on proactive approaches, e.g., to predict the adversary's next actions based on past events. Building accurate prediction models requires knowledge from many organizations; alas, this entails disclosing sensitive information, such as network structures, security postures, and policies, which might often be undesirable or outright impossible. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of using Federated Learning (FL) to predict future security events. To this end, we introduce Cerberus, a system enabling collaborative training of Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) models for participating organizations. The intuition is that FL could potentially offer a middle-ground between the non-private approach where the training data is pooled at a central server and the low-utility alternative of only training local models. We instantiate Cerberus on a dataset obtained from a major security company's intrusion prevention product and evaluate it vis-a-vis utility, robustness, and privacy, as well as how participants contribute to and benefit from the system. Overall, our work sheds light on both the positive aspects and the challenges of using FL for this task and paves the way for deploying federated approaches to predictive security.

Chatbots are used in many applications, e.g., automated agents, smart home assistants, interactive characters in online games, etc. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure they do not behave in undesired manners, providing offensive or toxic responses to users. This is not a trivial task as state-of-the-art chatbot models are trained on large, public datasets openly collected from the Internet. This paper presents a first-of-its-kind, large-scale measurement of toxicity in chatbots. We show that publicly available chatbots are prone to providing toxic responses when fed toxic queries. Even more worryingly, some non-toxic queries can trigger toxic responses too. We then set out to design and experiment with an attack, ToxicBuddy, which relies on fine-tuning GPT-2 to generate non-toxic queries that make chatbots respond in a toxic manner. Our extensive experimental evaluation demonstrates that our attack is effective against public chatbot models and outperforms manually-crafted malicious queries proposed by previous work. We also evaluate three defense mechanisms against ToxicBuddy, showing that they either reduce the attack performance at the cost of affecting the chatbot's utility or are only effective at mitigating a portion of the attack. This highlights the need for more research from the computer security and online safety communities to ensure that chatbot models do not hurt their users. Overall, we are confident that ToxicBuddy can be used as an auditing tool and that our work will pave the way toward designing more effective defenses for chatbot safety.

Previous work suggests that people's preference for different kinds of information depends on more than just accuracy. This could happen because the messages contained within different pieces of information may either be well-liked or repulsive. Whereas factual information must often convey uncomfortable truths, misinformation can have little regard for veracity and leverage psychological processes which increase its attractiveness and proliferation on social media. In this review, we argue that when misinformation proliferates, this happens because the social media environment enables adherence to misinformation by reducing, rather than increasing, the psychological cost of doing so. We cover how attention may often be shifted away from accuracy and towards other goals, how social and individual cognition is affected by misinformation and the cases under which debunking it is most effective, and how the formation of online groups affects information consumption patterns, often leading to more polarization and radicalization. Throughout, we make the case that polarization and misinformation adherence are closely tied. We identify ways in which the psychological cost of adhering to misinformation can be increased when designing anti-misinformation interventions or resilient affordances, and we outline open research questions that the CSCW community can take up in further understanding this cost.

The "Decentralised Web" (DW) is an evolving concept, which encompasses technologies aimed at providing greater transparency and openness on the web. The DW relies on independent servers (aka instances) that mesh together in a peer-to-peer fashion to deliver a range of services (e.g. micro-blogs, image sharing, video streaming). However, toxic content moderation in this decentralised context is challenging. This is because there is no central entity that can define toxicity, nor a large central pool of data that can be used to build universal classifiers. It is therefore unsurprising that there have been several high-profile cases of the DW being misused to coordinate and disseminate harmful material. Using a dataset of 9.9M posts from 117K users on Pleroma (a popular DW microblogging service), we quantify the presence of toxic content. We find that toxic content is prevalent and spreads rapidly between instances. We show that automating per-instance content moderation is challenging due to the lack of sufficient training data available and the effort required in labelling. We therefore propose and evaluate ModPair, a model sharing system that effectively detects toxic content, gaining an average per-instance macro-F1 score 0.89.

Internet memes have become a dominant method of communication; at the same time, however, they are also increasingly being used to advocate extremism and foster derogatory beliefs. Nonetheless, we do not have a firm understanding as to which perceptual aspects of memes cause this phenomenon. In this work, we assess the efficacy of current state-of-the-art multimodal machine learning models toward hateful meme detection, and in particular with respect to their generalizability across platforms. We use two benchmark datasets comprising 12,140 and 10,567 images from 4chan's "Politically Incorrect" board (/pol/) and Facebook's Hateful Memes Challenge dataset to train the competition's top-ranking machine learning models for the discovery of the most prominent features that distinguish viral hateful memes from benign ones. We conduct three experiments to determine the importance of multimodality on classification performance, the influential capacity of fringe Web communities on mainstream social platforms and vice versa, and the models' learning transferability on 4chan memes. Our experiments show that memes' image characteristics provide a greater wealth of information than its textual content. We also find that current systems developed for online detection of hate speech in memes necessitate further concentration on its visual elements to improve their interpretation of underlying cultural connotations, implying that multimodal models fail to adequately grasp the intricacies of hate speech in memes and generalize across social media platforms.

Growing evidence points to recurring influence campaigns on social media, often sponsored by state actors aiming to manipulate public opinion on sensitive political topics. Typically, campaigns are performed through instrumented accounts, known as troll accounts; despite their prominence, however, little work has been done to detect these accounts in the wild. In this paper, we present TROLLMAGNIFIER, a detection system for troll accounts. Our key observation, based on analysis of known Russian-sponsored troll accounts identified by Reddit, is that they show loose coordination, often interacting with each other to further specific narratives. Therefore, troll accounts controlled by the same actor often show similarities that can be leveraged for detection. TROLLMAGNIFIER learns the typical behavior of known troll accounts and identifies more that behave similarly. We train TROLLMAGNIFIER on a set of 335 known troll accounts and run it on a large dataset of Reddit accounts. Our system identifies 1,248 potential troll accounts; we then provide a multi-faceted analysis to corroborate the correctness of our classification. In particular, 66% of the detected accounts show signs of being instrumented by malicious actors (e.g., they were created on the same exact day as a known troll, they have since been suspended by Reddit, etc.). They also discuss similar topics as the known troll accounts and exhibit temporal synchronization in their activity. Overall, we show that using TROLLMAGNIFIER, one can grow the initial knowledge of potential trolls provided by Reddit by over 300%.

The dissemination and reach of scientific knowledge have increased at a blistering pace. In this context, e-Print servers have played a central role by providing scientists with a rapid and open mechanism for disseminating research without waiting for the (lengthy) peer review process. While helping the scientific community in several ways, e-Print servers also provide scientific communicators and the general public with access to a wealth of knowledge without paying hefty subscription fees. This motivates us to study how e-Prints are positioned within Web community discussions. In this paper, we analyze data from two Web communities: 14 years of Reddit data and over 4 from 4chan's Politically Incorrect board. Our findings highlight the presence of e-Prints in both science-enthusiast and general-audience communities. Real-world events and distinct factors influence the e-Prints people's discussions; e.g., there was a surge of COVID-19-related research publications during the early months of the outbreak and increased references to e-Prints in online discussions. Text in e-Prints and in online discussions referencing them has a low similarity, suggesting that the latter are not exclusively talking about the findings in the former. Further, our analysis of a sample of threads highlights: 1) misinterpretation and generalization of research findings, 2) early research findings being amplified as a source for future predictions, and 3) questioning findings from a pseudoscientific e-Print. Overall, our work emphasizes the need to quickly and effectively validate non-peer-reviewed e-Prints that get substantial press/social media coverage to help mitigate wrongful interpretations of scientific outputs.

Short videos have become one of the leading media used by younger generations to express themselves online and thus a driving force in shaping online culture. In this context, TikTok has emerged as a platform where viral videos are often posted first. In this paper, we study what elements of short videos posted on TikTok contribute to their virality. We apply a mixed-method approach to develop a codebook and identify important virality features. We do so vis-\`a-vis three research hypotheses; namely, that: 1) the video content, 2) TikTok's recommendation algorithm, and 3) the popularity of the video creator contribute to virality. We collect and label a dataset of 400 TikTok videos and train classifiers to help us identify the features that influence virality the most. While the number of followers is the most powerful predictor, close-up and medium-shot scales also play an essential role. So does the lifespan of the video, the presence of text, and the point of view. Our research highlights the characteristics that distinguish viral from non-viral TikTok videos, laying the groundwork for developing additional approaches to create more engaging online content and proactively identify possibly risky content that is likely to reach a large audience.

This paper presents a multi-platform computational pipeline geared to identify social media posts discussing (known) conspiracy theories. We use 189 conspiracy claims collected by Snopes, and find 66k posts and 277k comments on Reddit, and 379k tweets discussing them. Then, we study how conspiracies are discussed on different Web communities and which ones are particularly influential in driving the discussion about them. Our analysis sheds light on how conspiracy theories are discussed and spread online, while highlighting multiple challenges in mitigating them.

Decentralising the Web is a desirable but challenging goal. One particular challenge is achieving decentralised content moderation in the face of various adversaries (e.g. trolls). To overcome this challenge, many Decentralised Web (DW) implementations rely on federation policies. Administrators use these policies to create rules that ban or modify content that matches specific rules. This, however, can have unintended consequences for many users. In this paper, we present the first study of federation policies on the DW, their in-the-wild usage, and their impact on users. We identify how these policies may negatively impact "innocent" users and outline possible solutions to avoid this problem in the future.

Generative models trained with Differential Privacy (DP) can be used to generate synthetic data while minimizing privacy risks. We analyze the impact of DP on these models vis-a-vis underrepresented classes/subgroups of data, specifically, studying: 1) the size of classes/subgroups in the synthetic data, and 2) the accuracy of classification tasks run on them. We also evaluate the effect of various levels of imbalance and privacy budgets. Our analysis uses three state-of-the-art DP models (PrivBayes, DP-WGAN, and PATE-GAN) and shows that DP yields opposite size distributions in the generated synthetic data. It affects the gap between the majority and minority classes/subgroups; in some cases by reducing it (a "Robin Hood" effect) and, in others, by increasing it (a "Matthew" effect). Either way, this leads to (similar) disparate impacts on the accuracy of classification tasks on the synthetic data, affecting disproportionately more the underrepresented subparts of the data. Consequently, when training models on synthetic data, one might incur the risk of treating different subpopulations unevenly, leading to unreliable or unfair conclusions.

This paper presents the first data-driven analysis of Gettr, a new social network platform launched by former US President Donald Trump's team. Among other things, we find that users on the platform heavily discuss politics, with a focus on the Trump campaign in the US and Bolsonaro's in Brazil. Activity on the platform has steadily been decreasing since its launch, although a core of verified users and early adopters kept posting and become central to it. Finally, although toxicity has been increasing over time, the average level of toxicity is still lower than the one recently observed on other fringe social networks like Gab and 4chan. Overall, we provide a first quantitative look at this new community, observing a lack of organic engagement and activity.

While the Internet has dramatically increased the exposure that research can receive, it has also facilitated harassment against scholars. To understand the impact that these attacks can have on the work of researchers, we perform a series of systematic interviews with researchers including academics, journalists, and activists, who have experienced targeted, Internet-facilitated harassment. We provide a framework for understanding the types of harassers that target researchers, the harassment that ensues, and the personal and professional impact on individuals and academic freedom. We then study preventative and remedial strategies available, and the institutions that prevent some of these strategies from being more effective. Finally, we discuss the ethical structures that could facilitate more equitable access to participating in research without serious personal suffering.

The news ecosystem has become increasingly complex, encompassing a wide range of sources with varying levels of trustworthiness, and with public commentary giving different spins to the same stories. In this paper, we present a multi-platform measurement of this ecosystem. We compile a list of 1,073 news websites and extract posts from four Web communities (Twitter, Reddit, 4chan, and Gab) that contain URLs from these sources. This yields a dataset of 38M posts containing 15M news URLs, spanning almost three years. We study the data along several axes, assessing the trustworthiness of shared news, designing a method to group news articles into stories, analyzing these stories are discussed and measuring the influence various Web communities have in that. Our analysis shows that different communities discuss different types of news, with polarized communities like Gab and /r/The_Donald subreddit disproportionately referencing untrustworthy sources. We also find that fringe communities often have a disproportionate influence on other platforms w.r.t. pushing narratives around certain news, for example about political elections, immigration, or foreign policy.

The availability of genomic data is essential to progress in biomedical research, personalized medicine, etc. However, its extreme sensitivity makes it problematic, if not outright impossible, to publish or share it. As a result, several initiatives have been launched to experiment with synthetic genomic data, e.g., using generative models to learn the underlying distribution of the real data and generate artificial datasets that preserve its salient characteristics without exposing it. This paper provides the first evaluation of both utility and privacy protection of six state-of-the-art models for generating synthetic genomic data. We assess the performance of the synthetic data on several common tasks, such as allele population statistics and linkage disequilibrium. We then measure privacy through the lens of membership inference attacks, i.e., inferring whether a record was part of the training data. Our experiments show that no single approach to generate synthetic genomic data yields both high utility and strong privacy across the board. Also, the size and nature of the training dataset matter. Moreover, while some combinations of datasets and models produce synthetic data with distributions close to the real data, there often are target data points that are vulnerable to membership inference. Looking forward, our techniques can be used by practitioners to assess the risks of deploying synthetic genomic data in the wild and serve as a benchmark for future work., Comment: Published in the Proceedings of the 29th Network and Distributed System Security Symposium (NDSS 2022)

Inference attacks against Machine Learning (ML) models allow adversaries to learn sensitive information about training data, model parameters, etc. While researchers have studied, in depth, several kinds of attacks, they have done so in isolation. As a result, we lack a comprehensive picture of the risks caused by the attacks, e.g., the different scenarios they can be applied to, the common factors that influence their performance, the relationship among them, or the effectiveness of possible defenses. In this paper, we fill this gap by presenting a first-of-its-kind holistic risk assessment of different inference attacks against machine learning models. We concentrate on four attacks -- namely, membership inference, model inversion, attribute inference, and model stealing -- and establish a threat model taxonomy. Our extensive experimental evaluation, run on five model architectures and four image datasets, shows that the complexity of the training dataset plays an important role with respect to the attack's performance, while the effectiveness of model stealing and membership inference attacks are negatively correlated. We also show that defenses like DP-SGD and Knowledge Distillation can only mitigate some of the inference attacks. Our analysis relies on a modular re-usable software, ML-Doctor, which enables ML model owners to assess the risks of deploying their models, and equally serves as a benchmark tool for researchers and practitioners.

The QAnon conspiracy theory claims that a cabal of (literally) blood-thirsty politicians and media personalities are engaged in a war to destroy society. By interpreting cryptic "drops" of information from an anonymous insider calling themself Q, adherents of the conspiracy theory believe that Donald Trump is leading them in an active fight against this cabal. QAnon has been covered extensively by the media, as its adherents have been involved in multiple violent acts, including the January 6th, 2021 seditious storming of the US Capitol building. Nevertheless, we still have relatively little understanding of how the theory evolved and spread on the Web, and the role played in that by multiple platforms. To address this gap, we study QAnon from the perspective of "Q" themself. We build a dataset of 4,949 canonical Q drops collected from six "aggregation sites," which curate and archive them from their original posting to anonymous and ephemeral image boards. We expose that these sites have a relatively low (overall) agreement, and thus at least some Q drops should probably be considered apocryphal. We then analyze the Q drops' contents to identify topics of discussion and find statistically significant indications that drops were not authored by a single individual. Finally, we look at how posts on Reddit are used to disseminate Q drops to wider audiences. We find that dissemination was (initially) limited to a few sub-communities and that, while heavy-handed moderation decisions have reduced the overall issue, the "gospel" of Q persists on the Web.