Cargando…

Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy

Differential privacy (DP) defines privacy protection by promising quantified indistinguishability between individuals who consent to share their privacy-sensitive information and those who do not. DP aims to deliver this promise by including well-crafted elements of random noise in the published dat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Shiliang, Hagermalm, Anton, Slavnic, Sanjin, Schiller, Elad Michael, Almgren, Magnus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10386022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37514803
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23146509
_version_ 1785081557540667392
author Zhang, Shiliang
Hagermalm, Anton
Slavnic, Sanjin
Schiller, Elad Michael
Almgren, Magnus
author_facet Zhang, Shiliang
Hagermalm, Anton
Slavnic, Sanjin
Schiller, Elad Michael
Almgren, Magnus
author_sort Zhang, Shiliang
collection PubMed
description Differential privacy (DP) defines privacy protection by promising quantified indistinguishability between individuals who consent to share their privacy-sensitive information and those who do not. DP aims to deliver this promise by including well-crafted elements of random noise in the published data, and thus there is an inherent tradeoff between the degree of privacy protection and the ability to utilize the protected data. Currently, several open-source tools have been proposed for DP provision. To the best of our knowledge, there is no comprehensive study for comparing these open-source tools with respect to their ability to balance DP’s inherent tradeoff as well as the use of system resources. This work proposes an open-source evaluation framework for privacy protection solutions and offers evaluation for OpenDP Smartnoise, Google DP, PyTorch Opacus, Tensorflow Privacy, and Diffprivlib. In addition to studying their ability to balance the above tradeoff, we consider discrete and continuous attributes by quantifying their performance under different data sizes. Our results reveal several patterns that developers should have in mind when selecting tools under different application needs and criteria. This evaluation survey can be the basis for an improved selection of open-source DP tools and quicker adaptation of DP.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10386022
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103860222023-07-30 Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy Zhang, Shiliang Hagermalm, Anton Slavnic, Sanjin Schiller, Elad Michael Almgren, Magnus Sensors (Basel) Article Differential privacy (DP) defines privacy protection by promising quantified indistinguishability between individuals who consent to share their privacy-sensitive information and those who do not. DP aims to deliver this promise by including well-crafted elements of random noise in the published data, and thus there is an inherent tradeoff between the degree of privacy protection and the ability to utilize the protected data. Currently, several open-source tools have been proposed for DP provision. To the best of our knowledge, there is no comprehensive study for comparing these open-source tools with respect to their ability to balance DP’s inherent tradeoff as well as the use of system resources. This work proposes an open-source evaluation framework for privacy protection solutions and offers evaluation for OpenDP Smartnoise, Google DP, PyTorch Opacus, Tensorflow Privacy, and Diffprivlib. In addition to studying their ability to balance the above tradeoff, we consider discrete and continuous attributes by quantifying their performance under different data sizes. Our results reveal several patterns that developers should have in mind when selecting tools under different application needs and criteria. This evaluation survey can be the basis for an improved selection of open-source DP tools and quicker adaptation of DP. MDPI 2023-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10386022/ /pubmed/37514803 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23146509 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Zhang, Shiliang
Hagermalm, Anton
Slavnic, Sanjin
Schiller, Elad Michael
Almgren, Magnus
Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title_full Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title_fullStr Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title_short Evaluation of Open-Source Tools for Differential Privacy
title_sort evaluation of open-source tools for differential privacy
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10386022/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37514803
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23146509
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangshiliang evaluationofopensourcetoolsfordifferentialprivacy
AT hagermalmanton evaluationofopensourcetoolsfordifferentialprivacy
AT slavnicsanjin evaluationofopensourcetoolsfordifferentialprivacy
AT schillereladmichael evaluationofopensourcetoolsfordifferentialprivacy
AT almgrenmagnus evaluationofopensourcetoolsfordifferentialprivacy