skip to main content
10.1145/2623330.2623642acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Differentially private network data release via structural inference

Authors Info & Claims
Published:24 August 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

Information networks, such as social media and email networks, often contain sensitive information. Releasing such network data could seriously jeopardize individual privacy. Therefore, we need to sanitize network data before the release. In this paper, we present a novel data sanitization solution that infers a network's structure in a differentially private manner. We observe that, by estimating the connection probabilities between vertices instead of considering the observed edges directly, the noise scale enforced by differential privacy can be greatly reduced. Our proposed method infers the network structure by using a statistical hierarchical random graph (HRG) model. The guarantee of differential privacy is achieved by sampling possible HRG structures in the model space via Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC). We theoretically prove that the sensitivity of such inference is only O(log n), where n is the number of vertices in a network. This bound implies less noise to be injected than those of existing works. We experimentally evaluate our approach on four real-life network datasets and show that our solution effectively preserves essential network structural properties like degree distribution, shortest path length distribution and influential nodes.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p911-sidebyside.mp4

mp4

279.1 MB

References

  1. J. Blocki, A. Blum, A. Datta, and O. Sheffet. Differentially private data analysis of social networks via restricted sensitivity. In ITCS, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. S. Brooks, A. Gelman, G. L. Jones, and X.-L. Meng. Handbook of Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. R. Chen, B. C. M. Fung, P. S. Yu, and B. C. Desai. Correlated network data publication via differential privacy. VLDBJ, in press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. S. Chen and S. Zhou. Recursive mechanism: towards node differential privacy and unrestricted joins. In SIGMOD, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. Cheng, A. W. C. Fu, and J. Liu. K-isomorphism: privacy preserving network publication against structural attacks. In SIGMOD, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. Clauset, C. Moore, and M. E. J. Newman. Structural inference of hierarchies in networks. In ICML on Statistical Network Analysis, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. A. Clauset, C. Moore, and M. E. J. Newman. Hierarchical structure and the prediction of missing links in networks. Nature, 453:98--101, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. G. Cormode, D. Srivastava, T. Yu, and Q. Zhang. Anonymizing bipartite graph data using safe groupings. PVLDB, 1(1):833--844, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. C. Dwork, F. McSherry, K. Nissim, and A. Smith. Calibrating noise to sensitivity in private data analysis. In TCC, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Gupta, A. Roth, and J. Ullman. Iterative constructions and private data release. In TCC, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. M. Hardt and A. Roth. Beating randomized response on incoherent matrices. In STOC, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M. Hay, C. Li, G. Miklau, and D. Jensen. Accurate estimation of the degree distribution of private networks. In ICDM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. M. Hay, G. Miklau, D. Jensen, D. F. Towsley, and P. Weis. Resisting structural re-identification in anonymized social networks. PVLDB, 1(1):102--114, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. V. Karwa, S. Raskhodnikova, A. Smith, and G. Yaroslavtsev. Private analysis of graph structure. PVLDB, 4(11):1146--1157, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. S. P. Kasiviswanathan, K. Nissim, S. Raskhodnikova, and A. Smith. Analyzing graphs with node differential privacy. In TCC, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. K. Liu and E. Terzi. Towards identity anonymization on graphs. In SIGMOD, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. F. McSherry. Privacy integrated queries: an extensible platform for privacy-preserving data analysis. Commun. ACM, 53(9), 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. F. McSherry and K. Talwar. Mechanism design via differential privacy. In FOCS, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. E. Mossel and E. Vigoda. Phylogenetic MCMC algorithms are misleading on mixtures of trees. Science, 309(5744):2207--2209, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. D. Proserpio, S. Goldberg, and F. McSherry. A work ow for differentially-private graph synthesis. In WOSN, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. A. Sala, X. Zhao, C. Wilson, H. Zheng, and B. Y. Zhao. Sharing graphs using differentially private graph models. In IMC, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. P. Samarati. Protecting respondents' identities in microdata release. TKDE, 13(6):1010--1027, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. E. Shen and T. Yu. Mining frequent graph patterns with differential privacy. In SIGKDD, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Y. Wang and X. Wu. Preserving differential privacy in degree-correlation based graph generation. TDP, 6(2), 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Y. Wang, X. Wu, and L. Wu. Differential privacy preserving spectral graph analysis. In PAKDD, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. L. Wu, X. Ying, X. Wu, and Z.-H. Zhou. Line orthogonality in adjacency eigenspace with application to community partition. In IJCAI, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. B. Zhou and J. Pei. Preserving privacy in social networks against neighborhood attacks. In ICDE, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. L. Zou, L. Chen, and M. T. Ozsu. K-automorphism: a general framework for privacy preserving network publication. PVLDB, 2(1):946--957, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Differentially private network data release via structural inference

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        KDD '14: Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining
        August 2014
        2028 pages
        ISBN:9781450329569
        DOI:10.1145/2623330

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 24 August 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        KDD '14 Paper Acceptance Rate151of1,036submissions,15%Overall Acceptance Rate1,133of8,635submissions,13%

        Upcoming Conference

        KDD '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader