NeurIPS 2026 Papers

Face Recognition systems are widely deployed in real-world applications, but they also raise privacy concerns due to unauthorized collection and misuse of facial data. Existing adversarial privacy protection methods rely on input-space perturbations to obfuscate identity information, yet their protection can degrade when adversaries learn restoration or purification mappings that partially invert the transformation. We study this setting as an asymmetric adversarial attack, in which reverse manipulation becomes feasible because existing defense paradigms do not control reversibility. To address this problem, we propose Asymmetric Reversible Face Protection (ARFP), a restoration-aware extension of personalized face cloaking that integrates privacy protection, keyed recovery, and tamper indication in a single framework. ARFP consists of three components: Key-Conditioned Manifold Binding, which ties the protection transformation to a user-provided key; Adversarial Restoration-Aware Training, which introduces a surrogate restoration adversary during training to improve robustness against evaluated inverse purification attacks; and Authorized Reversible Restoration, which supports recovery with the correct key while providing nonce-based tamper indication. Extensive experiments under the threat models considered in this work show that ARFP improves resistance to the evaluated restoration attacks while preserving authorized recovery utility. These results provide empirical evidence of key-sensitive recovery behavior and tamper awareness in the tested settings.

Recent work in the privacy literature shows that sample-targeted membership inference attacks (MIA) significantly outperform untargeted approaches by a wide margin. Motivated by this observation, we address the following question: Can the privacy vulnerability of individual training points be assessed without training shadow models? We show that per-sample exposure to MIA is governed not only by a point's loss, but also by a data-dependent geometric measure. In the linear setting, we derive a closed-form decomposition of individual black-box MIA vulnerability into a population leverage score and a residual loss term, making explicit how sample-dependent geometry translates into privacy exposure. Since the final layer of most modern architectures is linear, we extend this framework to deep networks and propose a surrogate score operating on last-layer representations that requires only a single trained model and no shadow models. Empirical evaluations across diverse datasets and architectures show that our score outperforms loss and gradient-norm baselines at identifying the highest-risk points under state-of-the-art attacks, providing a computationally efficient and theoretically grounded tool for per-sample privacy risk assessment.

Differential privacy (DP) has traditionally been used to provide theoretical upper bounds on an algorithm's stability to changing its training data. In modern machine learning applications, achieving strong tradeoffs between utility and theoretical privacy is challenging, and thus one may optimistically hope that existing theoretical analyses are loose. Recent work on \emph{privacy auditing} has adopted a dual viewpoint, instead lower bounding the true privacy of an algorithm by constructing empirical distinguishing events. The auditing literature has thus far yielded a pessimistic outlook on the looseness of theoretical privacy bounds for DP-SGD, the de facto private training method in modern ML, as nearly-matching empirical lower bounds have been achieved under various threat models \cite{NasrHSBTJCT23, AnnamalaiC24, CebereBP25}. In this work, we propose the empirical privacy lower bound of an algorithm as a concrete metric to optimize for, complementary to the theoretical upper bound. We give a lightweight defense framework that generically augments optimization methods in the ML pipeline to have significantly-improved empirical privacy on standard benchmarks. Moreover, we show that our framework comes at \emph{no theoretical privacy cost} when augmenting DP-SGD, unlike previous defenses against membership inference attacks. We evaluate our defense against a broad range of audit constructions, models, and datasets to demonstrate its flexibility. Our code implementation can be found at \href{https://github.com/neurips26privacyaudit/empirical-privacy-defense}{this anonymous repository}.