Consider the following problem: given a metric space, some of whose points are "clients", open a set of at most @math facilities to minimize the average distance from the clients to these facilities. This is just the well-studied @math -median problem, for which many approximation algorithms and hardness results are known. Note that the objective function encourages opening facilities in areas where there are many clients, and given a solution, it is often possible to get a good idea of where the clients are located. However, this poses the following quandary: what if the identity of the clients is sensitive information that we would like to keep private? Is it even possible to design good algorithms for this problem that preserve the privacy of the clients? In this paper, we initiate a systematic study of algorithms for discrete optimization problems in the framework of differential privacy (which formalizes the idea of protecting the privacy of individual input elements). We show that many such problems indeed have good approximation algorithms that preserve differential privacy; this is even in cases where it is impossible to preserve cryptographic definitions of privacy while computing any non-trivial approximation to even the_value_ of an optimal solution, let alone the entire solution. Apart from the @math -median problem, we study the problems of vertex and set cover, min-cut, facility location, Steiner tree, and the recently introduced submodular maximization problem, "Combinatorial Public Projects" (CPP).
Nonetheless, @cite_11 and others show a number of positive approximation results under versions of the functional privacy model. @cite_24 provide positive results in the function privacy setting when the algorithm is permitted to leak few bits (each equivalence class of input need not produce identical output, but must be one of at most @math possible outcomes). Indyk and Woodruff also give some positive results for the approximation of @math distance and a nearest neighbor problem @cite_26 . However, as functional privacy extends SFE, it does not protect sensitive data that can be inferred from the output.
@cite_24 @cite_26 @cite_11
2294907105 2047515520 2164649498 2043868537
Private regression has received attention from both database and security communities. Recent work by (USENIX Security 2014) analyzed the functional mechanism ( VLDB 2012) for training linear regression models over medical data. Unfortunately, they found that model accuracy is already unacceptable with differential privacy when @math . We address this issue, presenting an explicit connection between differential privacy and stable learning theory through which a substantially better privacy utility tradeoff can be obtained. Perhaps more importantly, our theory reveals that the most basic mechanism in differential privacy, output perturbation, can be used to obtain a better tradeoff for all convex-Lipschitz-bounded learning tasks. Since output perturbation is simple to implement, it means that our approach is potentially widely applicable in practice. We go on to apply it on the same medical data as used by Encouragingly, we achieve accurate models even for @math . In the last part of this paper, we study the impact of our improved differentially private mechanisms on model inversion attacks, a privacy attack introduced by We observe that the improved tradeoff makes the resulting differentially private model more susceptible to inversion attacks. We analyze this phenomenon formally. Many approximation algorithms have been presented in the last decades for hard search problems. The focus of this paper is on cryptographic applications, where it is desired to design algorithms which do not leak unnecessary information. Specifically, we are interested in private approximation algorithms -- efficient algorithms whose output does not leak information not implied by the optimal solutions to the search problems. Privacy requirements add constraints on the approximation algorithms; in particular, known approximation algorithms usually leak a lot of information.For functions, [, ICALP 2001] presented a natural requirement that a private algorithm should not leak information not implied by the original function. Generalizing this requirement to search problems is not straightforward as an input may have many different outputs. We present a new definition that captures a minimal privacy requirement from such algorithms -- applied to an input instance, it should not leak any information that is not implied by its collection of exact solutions. Although our privacy requirement seems minimal, we show that for well studied problems, as vertex cover and 3SAT, private approximation algorithms are unlikely to exist even for poor approximation ratios. Similar to [, STOC 2001], we define a relaxed notion of approximation algorithms that leak (little) information, and demonstrate the applicability of this notion by showing near optimal approximation algorithms for 3SAT that leak little information. The k-anonymity privacy requirement for publishing microdata requires that each equivalence class (i.e., a set of records that are indistinguishable from each other with respect to certain “identifying” attributes) contains at least k records. Recently, several authors have recognized that k-anonymity cannot prevent attribute disclosure. The notion of l-diversity has been proposed to address this; l-diversity requires that each equivalence class has at least l well-represented (in Section 2) values for each sensitive attribute. In this paper, we show that l-diversity has a number of limitations. In particular, it is neither necessary nor sufficient to prevent attribute disclosure. Motivated by these limitations, we propose a new notion of privacy called “closeness.” We first present the base model t-closeness, which requires that the distribution of a sensitive attribute in any equivalence class is close to the distribution of the attribute in the overall table (i.e., the distance between the two distributions should be no more than a threshold t). We then propose a more flexible privacy model called (n,t)-closeness that offers higher utility. We describe our desiderata for designing a distance measure between two probability distributions and present two distance measures. We discuss the rationale for using closeness as a privacy measure and illustrate its advantages through examples and experiments. Consider two parties Alice and Bob, who hold private inputs x and y, and wish to compute a function f(x, y) privately in the information theoretic sense; that is, each party should learn nothing beyond f(x, y). However, the communication channel available to them is noisy. This means that the channel can introduce errors in the transmission between the two parties. Moreover, the channel is adversarial in the sense that it knows the protocol that Alice and Bob are running, and maliciously introduces errors to disrupt the communication, subject to some bound on the total number of errors. A fundamental question in this setting is to design a protocol that remains private in the presence of large number of errors. If Alice and Bob are only interested in computing f(x, y) correctly, and not privately, then quite robust protocols are known that can tolerate a constant fraction of errors. However, none of these solutions is applicable in the setting of privacy, as they inherently leak information about the parties' inputs. This leads to the question whether we can simultaneously achieve privacy and error-resilience against a constant fraction of errors. We show that privacy and error-resilience are contradictory goals. In particular, we show that for every constant c > 0, there exists a function f which is privately computable in the error-less setting, but for which no private and correct protocol is resilient against a c-fraction of errors. The same impossibility holds also for sub-constant noise rate, e.g., when c is exponentially small (as a function of the input size).