Differential privacy is not a silver bullet for all privacy problems.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. Implicit authentication consists of a server authenticating a user based on the user's usage profile, instead of/in addition to relying on something the user explicitly knows (passwords, private keys, etc.). While implicit authentication makes identity theft by third parties more difficult, it requires the server to learn and store the user's usage profile. Recently, the first privacy-preserving implicit authentication system was presented, in which the server does not learn the user's profile. It uses an ad hoc two-party computation protocol to compare the user's fresh sampled features against an encrypted stored user's profile. The protocol requires storing the usage profile and comparing against it using two different cryptosystems, one of them order-preserving; furthermore, features must be numerical. We present here a simpler protocol based on set intersection that has the advantages of: i) requiring only one cryptosystem; ii) not leaking the relative order of fresh feature samples; iii) being able to deal with any type of features (numerical or non-numerical).

We review the use of differential privacy (DP) for privacy protection in machine learning (ML). We show that, driven by the aim of preserving the accuracy of the learned models, DP-based ML implementations are so loose that they do not offer the ex ante privacy guarantees of DP. Instead, what they deliver is basically noise addition similar to the traditional (and often criticized) statistical disclosure control approach. Due to the lack of formal privacy guarantees, the actual level of privacy offered must be experimentally assessed ex post , which is done very seldom. In this respect, we present empirical results showing that standard anti-overfitting techniques in ML can achieve a better utility/privacy/efficiency trade-off than DP.