Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
65 lines (43 loc) · 3.2 KB

File metadata and controls

65 lines (43 loc) · 3.2 KB

Federated Learning Defence with Byzantine Attacks

Federated learning (FL) enables training across many clients without centralizing raw data, but the this setup makes it vulnerable to Byzantine clients that send poisoned updates. Robust aggregation and proactive defences aim to limit the influence of such clients and represents a research direction. This framework provides the ability to evaluate SoTA defence techniques against various Byzantine attacks in a variety of federated learning scenarios.

List of supported Defences and attacks

Defences

Pre-aggregation strategies

Attacks


Example results

We demonstrate the capabilities of FedXplore through small-scale experiment on CIFAR-10 using ResNet-18 with multiple defense techniques under a range of adversarial attacks.

Reproduce this table:

python scripts/byz_cifar10_script.py > byz_cifar10_log_script.txt &

Test accuracy for Byzantine tolerance techniques under Various Attacks. The percentage defines the number of Byzantine clients. The table shows that existing defenses often excel against specific attacks but lack consistent protection overall.

Defence No Attack Label Flip (50%) Sign Flip (60%) IPM (50%)
FedAvg 0.902 0.207 0.100 0.832
FLTrust 0.767 0.694 0.100 0.519
Recess 0.887 0.633 0.100 0.774
Zeno 0.910 0.156 0.410 0.100
CC 0.911 0.603 0.102 0.864
CC + FBM 0.915 0.818 0.098 0.923
CC + Bucketing 0.845 0.887 0.089 0.100
Safeguard 0.918 0.102 0.100 0.112

The table shows that many defences are effective only against a subset of attacks. For instance, Zeno performs well against sign-flip in our setup, while CC+FBM mitigates IPM strongly. No single method provides consistent protection across all attack types and attack proportions — highlighting the need for standardized, extensible benchmarks and combination strategies (e.g., pre-aggregation + aggregator).