Code Monkey home page Code Monkey logo

transferattackeval's Introduction

Revisiting Transferable Adversarial Images

Revisiting Transferable Adversarial Images: Systemization, Evaluation, and New Insights. Zhengyu Zhao*, Hanwei Zhang*, Renjue Li*, Ronan Sicre, Laurent Amsaleg, Michael Backes, Qi Li, Qian Wang, Chao Shen.

We identify two main problems in common evaluation practices:
(1) for attack transferability, lack of systematic, one-to-one attack comparisons and fair hyperparameter settings;
(2) for attack stealthiness, simply no evaluations.

We address these problems by
(1) introducing a complete attack categorization and conducting systematic and fair intra-category analyses on transferability;
(2) considering diverse imperceptibility metrics and finer-grained stealthiness characteristics from the perspective of attack traceback.

We draw new insights, e.g.,
(1) under a fair attack hyperparameter setting, one early attack method, DI, actually outperforms all the follow-up methods;
(2) popular diffusion-based defenses give a false sense of security since it is indeed largely bypassed by (black-box) transferable attacks;
(3) even when all attacks are bounded by the same Lp norm, they lead to dramatically different stealthiness performance, which negatively correlates with their transferability performance.

We provide the first large-scale evaluation of transferable adversarial examples on ImageNet, involving 23 representative attacks against 9 representative defenses.

We reveal that existing problematic evaluations have indeed caused misleading conclusions and missing points, and as a result, hindered the assessment of the actual progress in this field.

Evaluated Attacks and Defenses

Attack Categorization (Welcome more papers!)

Gradient Stabilization Attacks [Code for 3 representative attacks]

Input Augmentation Attacks [Code for 5 representative attacks]

Feature Disruption Attacks [Code for 5 representative attacks]

Surrogate Refinement Attacks [Code for 5 representative attacks]

Generative Modeling Attacks

Surveys/Evaluations/Explanations

transferattackeval's People

Contributors

cas-lrj avatar hanwei0912 avatar ryc-98 avatar yangbo93 avatar zhengyuzhao avatar

Stargazers

 avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar  avatar

Watchers

 avatar  avatar  avatar

transferattackeval's Issues

What factors could potentially affect the performance of NAA and FIA?

Hello, Zhengyu, thank you for your excellent work. Notice that the performance of NAA and FIA attacks in Table 5 are quite worse than their original papers. I would like to ask, what factors could potentially lead the unsuccess of those methods? Any suggestions to improve their performance? Thanks a lot.

Question about implementation of admix

I noticed a potential difference between the Admix paper and the re-implementation here. The code here uses img_x + 0.2 * img_other as inputs to the model (see code below) which may be missing the $\gamma_i = 1/2^i$ factor from Eq. 3 in the paper.

...
for c in range(multi_copies):
    img_other = img[torch.randperm(img.shape[0])].view(img.size())
    logits = model(img_x + 0.2 * img_other)
    loss = nn.CrossEntropyLoss(reduction='sum')(logits,labels)
    loss.backward()
    input_grad = input_grad + img_x.grad.clone()
...

I could be totally missing something here too so please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks!

Loaded Checkpoint of RFA

Hi,
Thanks for your excellent work!
I'd like to reproduce RFA. I noticed that you load a checkpoint model for implementation of this method. Can you kindly share this checkpoint?

Recommend Projects

  • React photo React

    A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.

  • Vue.js photo Vue.js

    🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.

  • Typescript photo Typescript

    TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.

  • TensorFlow photo TensorFlow

    An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone

  • Django photo Django

    The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

  • D3 photo D3

    Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉

Recommend Topics

  • javascript

    JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.

  • web

    Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.

  • server

    A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.

  • Machine learning

    Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.

  • Game

    Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.

Recommend Org

  • Facebook photo Facebook

    We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.

  • Microsoft photo Microsoft

    Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.

  • Google photo Google

    Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.

  • D3 photo D3

    Data-Driven Documents codes.