Search

We consider the problem of the private release of statistics (like aggregate payrolls) where it is critical to preserve the contribution made by a small number of outlying large entities. We propose a privacy formalism, per-record zero concentrated differential privacy (PzCDP), where the privacy loss associated with each record is a public function of that record's value. Unlike other formalisms which provide different privacy losses to different records, PzCDP's privacy loss depends explicitly on the confidential data. We define our formalism, derive its properties, and propose mechanisms which satisfy PzCDP that are uniquely suited to publishing skewed or heavy-tailed statistics, where a small number of records contribute substantially to query answers. This targeted relaxation helps overcome the difficulties of applying standard DP to these data products., Comment: 14 pages, 5 figures

To quantify trade-offs between increasing demand for open data sharing and concerns about sensitive information disclosure, statistical data privacy (SDP) methodology analyzes data release mechanisms which sanitize outputs based on confidential data. Two dominant frameworks exist: statistical disclosure control (SDC), and more recent, differential privacy (DP). Despite framing differences, both SDC and DP share the same statistical problems at its core. For inference problems, we may either design optimal release mechanisms and associated estimators that satisfy bounds on disclosure risk, or we may adjust existing sanitized output to create new optimal estimators. Both problems rely on uncertainty quantification in evaluating risk and utility. In this review, we discuss the statistical foundations common to both SDC and DP, highlight major developments in SDP, and present exciting open research problems in private inference., Comment: Submitted to Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, March 2023 Volume

Differential privacy (DP) quantifies privacy loss by analyzing noise injected into output statistics. For non-trivial statistics, this noise is necessary to ensure finite privacy loss. However, data curators frequently release collections of statistics where some use DP mechanisms and others are released as-is, i.e., without additional randomized noise. Consequently, DP alone cannot characterize the privacy loss attributable to the entire collection of releases. In this paper, we present a privacy formalism, $(\epsilon, \{ \Theta_z\}_{z \in \mathcal{Z}})$-Pufferfish ($\epsilon$-TP for short when $\{ \Theta_z\}_{z \in \mathcal{Z}}$ is implied), a collection of Pufferfish mechanisms indexed by realizations of a random variable $Z$ representing public information not protected with DP noise. First, we prove that this definition has similar properties to DP. Next, we introduce mechanisms for releasing partially private data (PPD) satisfying $\epsilon$-TP and prove their desirable properties. We provide algorithms for sampling from the posterior of a parameter given PPD. We then compare this inference approach to the alternative where noisy statistics are deterministically combined with Z. We derive mild conditions under which using our algorithms offers both theoretical and computational improvements over this more common approach. Finally, we demonstrate all the effects above on a case study on COVID-19 data., Comment: 34 pages, 4 figures; submitted to JMLR

Implementations of the exponential mechanism in differential privacy often require sampling from intractable distributions. When approximate procedures like Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) are used, the end result incurs costs to both privacy and accuracy. Existing work has examined these effects asymptotically, but implementable finite sample results are needed in practice so that users can specify privacy budgets in advance and implement samplers with exact privacy guarantees. In this paper, we use tools from ergodic theory and perfect simulation to design exact finite runtime sampling algorithms for the exponential mechanism by introducing an intermediate modified target distribution using artificial atoms. We propose an additional modification of this sampling algorithm that maintains its $\epsilon$-DP guarantee and has improved runtime at the cost of some utility. We then compare these methods in scenarios where we can explicitly calculate a $\delta$ cost (as in $(\epsilon, \delta)$-DP) incurred when using standard MCMC techniques. Much as there is a well known trade-off between privacy and utility, we demonstrate that there is also a trade-off between privacy guarantees and runtime., Comment: 16 pages, 3 figures