Machine learning (ML) models have been shown to leak private information from their training datasets. Differential Privacy (DP), typically implemented through the differential private stochastic gradient descent algorithm (DP-SGD), has become the standard solution to bound leakage from the models. Despite recent improvements, DP-SGD-based approaches for private learning still usually struggle in the high privacy (ε≤1) and low data regimes, and when the private training datasets are imbalanced. To overcome these limitations, we propose Differentially Private Prototype Learning (DPPL) as a new paradigm for private transfer learning. DPPL leverages publicly pre-trained encoders to extract features from private data and generates DP prototypes that represent each private class in the embedding space and can be publicly released for inference. Since our DP prototypes can be obtained from only a few private training data points and without iterative noise addition, they offer high-utility predictions and strong privacy guarantees even under the notion of pure DP. We additionally show that privacy-utility trade-offs can be further improved when leveraging the public data beyond pre-training of the encoder: in particular, we can privately sample our DP prototypes from the publicly available data points used to train the encoder. Our experimental evaluation with four state-of-the-art encoders, four vision datasets, and under different data and imbalancedness regimes demonstrate DPPL's high performance under strong privacy guarantees in challenging private learning setups.

Model distillation has become essential for creating deployable language models, but their widespread deployment raises concerns about about their resilience to adversarial manipulation. This paper investigates how adversaries can inject subtle biases into teacher models through minimal data poisoning during training, which propagates to a smaller distilled student model and becomes significantly amplified. We identify two propagation modes: Untargeted (affecting multiple tasks) and Targeted (focusing on specific task while maintaining normal behavior elsewhere). With only 25 poisoned samples (0.25% poisoning rate), student models generate biased responses 76.9% of the time in targeted scenarios versus 69.4% in teachers, while untargeted propagation shows 5.7X-29.2X higher adversarial bias rate in students on unseen tasks. We validate across six bias types (targeted advertisement, phishing link, narrative manipulations, insecure coding practices), various distillation methods, and text/code generation modalities. Current defense mechanisms—including perplexity filtering, bias detection systems, and LLM-based autoraters—prove inadequate against these attacks. We propose practical design principles for building effective adversarial bias mitigation strategies to address this threat vector.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) has been the center of the most outstanding advancements in the last years. The ability to analyze considerable streams of data in real time makes these technologies the most promising tool in many domains, including cybersecurity. As an outstanding example, ML can be used for identifying malware because of its ability to detect patterns otherwise difficult to see for humans and hardcoded rules. However, the use of AI and ML in security-relevant domains raised rightful concerns about their trustworthiness and robustness, especially when facing adaptive attackers. Additionally, privacy threats are now emerging as a crucial aspect and need proper testing and possibly mitigation to prevent data stealing and leakage of sensitive information. AISec provides a venue for presenting and discussing new developments in the intersection of security and privacy with AI and ML.

We propose a simple heuristic privacy analysis of noisy clipped stochastic gradient descent (DP-SGD) in the setting where only the last iterate is released and the intermediate iterates remain hidden. Namely, our heuristic assumes a linear structure for the model. We show experimentally that our heuristic is predictive of the outcome of privacy auditing applied to various training procedures. Thus it can be used prior to training as a rough estimate of the final privacy leakage. We also probe the limitations of our heuristic by providing some artificial counterexamples where it underestimates the privacy leakage. The standard composition-based privacy analysis of DP-SGD effectively assumes that the adversary has access to all intermediate iterates, which is often unrealistic. However, this analysis remains the state of the art in practice. While our heuristic does not replace a rigorous privacy analysis, it illustrates the large gap between the best theoretical upper bounds and the privacy auditing lower bounds and sets a target for further work to improve the theoretical privacy analyses.

Large language models are prone to *memorizing* some of their training data. Memorized (and possibly sensitive) samples can then be extracted at generation time by adversarial or benign users. There is hope that *model alignment*---a standard training process that tunes a model to harmlessly follow user instructions---would mitigate the risk of extraction. However, we develop two novel attacks that undo a language model's alignment and recover thousands of training examples from popular proprietary aligned models such as OpenAI's ChatGPT. Our work highlights the limitations of existing safeguards to prevent training data leakage in production language models.

Many stakeholders---from model developers to policymakers---seek to minimize the risks of large language models (LLMs). Key to this goal is whether technical safeguards can impede the misuse of LLMs, even when models are customizable via fine-tuning or when model weights are openly available. Several recent studies have proposed methods to produce durable LLM safeguards for open-weight LLMs that can withstand adversarial modifications of the model's weights via fine-tuning. This holds the promise of raising adversaries' costs even under strong threat models where adversaries can directly fine-tune parameters. However, we caution against over-reliance on such methods in their current state. Through several case studies, we demonstrate that even the evaluation of these defenses is exceedingly difficult and can easily mislead audiences into thinking that safeguards are more durable than they really are. We draw lessons from the failure modes that we identify and suggest that future research carefully cabin claims to more constrained, well-defined, and rigorously examined threat models, which can provide useful and candid assessments to stakeholders.

It is now common to evaluate Large Language Models (LLMs) by having humans manually vote to evaluate model outputs, in contrast to typical benchmarks that evaluate knowledge or skill at some particular task. Chatbot Arena, the most popular benchmark of this type, ranks models by asking users to select the better response between two randomly selected models (without revealing which model was responsible for the generations). These platforms are widely trusted as a fair and accurate measure of LLM capabilities. In this paper, we show that if bot protection and other defenses are not implemented, these voting-based benchmarks are potentially vulnerable to adversarial manipulation. Specifically, we show that an attacker can alter the leaderboard (to promote their favorite model or demote competitors) at the cost of roughly a thousand votes (verified in a simulated, offline version of Chatbot Arena). Our attack consists of two steps: first, we show how an attacker can determine which model was used to generate a given reply with more than $95%$ accuracy; and then, the attacker can use this information to consistently vote for (or against) a target model. Working with the Chatbot Arena developers, we identify, propose, and implement mitigations to improve the robustness of Chatbot Arena against adversarial manipulation, which, based on our analysis, substantially increases the cost of such attacks. Some of these defenses were present before our collaboration, such as bot protection with Cloudflare, malicious user detection, and rate limiting. Others, including reCAPTCHA and login are being integrated to strengthen the security in Chatbot Arena.

An important question today is whether a given text was used to train a large language model (LLM). A completion test is often employed: check if the LLM completes a sufficiently complex text. This, however, requires a ground-truth definition of membership; most commonly, it is defined as a member based on the n-gram overlap between the target text and any text in the dataset. In this work, we demonstrate that this n-gram based membership definition can be effectively gamed. We study scenarios where sequences are non-members for a given n and we find that completion tests still succeed. We find many natural cases of this phenomenon by retraining LLMs from scratch after removing all training samples that were completed; these cases include exact duplicates, near-duplicates, and even short overlaps. They showcase that it is difficult to find a single viable choice of n for membership definitions. Using these insights, we design adversarial datasets that can cause a given target sequence to be completed without containing it, for any reasonable choice of n. Our findings highlight the inadequacy of n-gram membership, suggesting membership definitions fail to account for auxiliary information available to the training algorithm.

"Machine unlearning" is a popular proposed solution for mitigating the existence of content in an AI model that is problematic for legal or moral reasons, including privacy, copyright, safety, and more. For example, unlearning is often invoked as a solution for removing the effects of specific information from a generative-AI model's parameters, e.g., a particular individual's personal data or the inclusion of copyrighted content in the model's training data. Unlearning is also proposed as a way to prevent a model from generating targeted types of information in its outputs, e.g., generations that closely resemble a particular individual's data or reflect the concept of "Spiderman." Both of these goals--the targeted removal of information from a model and the targeted suppression of information from a model's outputs--present various technical and substantive challenges. We provide a framework for ML researchers and policymakers to think rigorously about these challenges, identifying several mismatches between the goals of unlearning and feasible implementations. These mismatches explain why unlearning is not a general-purpose solution for circumscribing generative-AI model behavior in service of broader positive impact.

State-of-the-art membership inference attacks (MIAs) typically require training many reference models, making it difficult to scale these attacks to large pre-trained language models (LLMs). As a result, prior research has either relied on weaker attacks that avoid training references (e.g., fine-tuning attacks), or on stronger attacks applied to small models and datasets. However, weaker attacks have been shown to be brittle and insights from strong attacks in simplified settings do not translate to today's LLMs. These challenges prompt an important question: are the limitations observed in prior work due to attack design choices, or are MIAs fundamentally ineffective on LLMs? We address this question by scaling LiRA--one of the strongest MIAs--to GPT-2 architectures ranging from 10M to 1B parameters, training references on over 20B tokens from the C4 dataset. Our results advance the understanding of MIAs on LLMs in four key ways. While (1) strong MIAs can succeed on pre-trained LLMs, (2) their effectiveness, remains limited (e.g., AUC<0.7) in practical settings. (3) Even when strong MIAs achieve better-than-random AUC, aggregate metrics can conceal substantial per-sample MIA decision instability: due to training randomness, many decisions are so unstable that they are statistically indistinguishable from a coin flip. Finally, (4) the relationship between MIA success and related LLM privacy metrics is not as straightforward as prior work has suggested.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) has been the center of the most outstanding advancements in the last years. The ability to analyze considerable streams of data in real time makes these technologies the most promising tool in many domains, including cybersecurity. As an outstanding example, ML can be used for identifying malware because of its ability to detect patterns otherwise difficult to see for humans and hard-coded rules. However, the use of AI and ML in security-relevant domains raised rightful concerns about their trustworthiness and robustness, espe- cially in front of adaptive attackers. Additionally, privacy threats are now emerging as a crucial aspect and need proper testing and possibly mitigation to prevent data stealing and leakage of sensitive information. AISec provides a venue for presenting and discussing new developments in the intersection of security and privacy with AI and ML. The AISec'24 workshop proceedings are available at: https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/3658644.3691545.

Speech models are often trained on sensitive data in order to improve model performance, leading to potential privacy leakage. Our work considers noise masking attacks, introduced by Amid et al. [1], which attack automatic speech recognition (ASR) models by requesting a transcript of an utterance which is partially replaced with noise. They show that when a record has been seen at training time, the model will transcribe the noisy record with its memorized sensitive transcript. In our work, we extend these attacks beyond ASR models, to attack pretrained speech encoders. Our method fine-tunes the encoder to produce an ASR model, and then performs noise masking on this model, which we find recovers private information from the pretraining data, despite the model never having seen transcripts at pretraining time! We show how to improve the precision of these attacks and investigate a number of countermeasures to our attacks.

We introduce the first model-stealing attack that extracts precise, nontrivial information from black-box production language models like OpenAI's ChatGPT or Google's PaLM-2. Specifically, our attack recovers the embedding projection layer (up to symmetries) of a transformer model, given typical API access. For under $20 USD, our attack extracts the entire projection matrix of OpenAI's Ada and Babbage language models. We thereby confirm, for the first time, that these black-box models have a hidden dimension of 1024 and 2048, respectively. We also recover the exact hidden dimension size of the GPT-3.5-turbo model, and estimate it would cost under \\$2,000 in queries to recover the entire projection matrix. We conclude with potential defenses and mitigations, and discuss the implications of possible future work that could extend our attack.

Differential privacy (DP) offers a theoretical upper bound on the potential privacy leakage of an algorithm, while empirical auditing establishes a practical lower bound. Auditing techniques exist for DP training algorithms. However machine learning can also be made private at inference. We propose the first framework for auditing private prediction where we instantiate adversaries with varying poisoning and query capabilities. This enables us to study the privacy leakage of four private prediction algorithms: PATE (Papernot et al., 2016), CaPC (Choquette-Choo et al., 2020), PromptPATE (Duan et al., 2023), and Private-kNN (Zhu et al., 2020). To conduct our audit, we introduce novel techniques to empirically evaluate privacy leakage in terms of Renyi DP. Our experiments show that (i) the privacy analysis of private prediction can be improved, (ii) algorithms which are easier to poison lead to much higher privacy leakage, and (iii) the privacy leakage is significantly lower for adversaries without query control than those with full control.

Aldo Carranza, Rezsa Farahani, Natalia Ponomareva, Alexey Kurakin, Matthew Jagielski, Milad Nasr. Proceedings of the 2024 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2024.

Deep learning models are often trained on distributed, web-scale datasets crawled from the internet. In this paper, we introduce two new dataset poisoning attacks that intentionally introduce malicious examples to a model’s performance. Our attacks are immediately practical and could, today, poison 10 popular datasets. Our first attack, split-view poisoning, exploits the mutable nature of internet content to ensure a dataset annotator’s initial view of the dataset differs from the view downloaded by subsequent clients. By exploiting specific invalid trust assumptions, we show how we could have poisoned 0.01% of the LAION-400M or COYO-700M datasets for just $60 USD. Our second attack, frontrunning poisoning, targets web-scale datasets that periodically snapshot crowd-sourced content—such as Wikipedia—where an attacker only needs a time-limited window to inject malicious examples. In light of both attacks, we notify the maintainers of each affected dataset and recommended several low-overhead defenses.

Daphne Ippolito, Florian Tramer, Milad Nasr, Chiyuan Zhang, Matthew Jagielski, Katherine Lee, Christopher Choquette Choo, Nicholas Carlini. Proceedings of the 16th International Natural Language Generation Conference. 2023.

We propose a scheme for auditing differentially private machine learning systems with a single training run. This exploits the parallelism of being able to add or remove multiple training examples independently. We analyze this using the connection between differential privacy and statistical generalization, which avoids the cost of group privacy. Our auditing scheme requires minimal assumptions about the algorithm and can be applied in the black-box or white-box setting. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework by applying it to DP-SGD, where we can achieve meaningful empirical privacy lower bounds by training only one model. In contrast, standard methods would require training hundreds of models.

Large language models are now tuned to align with the goals of their creators, namely to be "helpful and harmless." These models should respond helpfully to user questions, but refuse to answer requests that could cause harm. However, adversarial users can construct inputs which circumvent attempts at alignment. In this work, we study adversarial alignment, and ask to what extent these models remain aligned when interacting with an adversarial user who constructs worst-case inputs (adversarial examples). These inputs are designed to cause the model to emit harmful content that would otherwise be prohibited. We show that existing NLP-based optimization attacks are insufficiently powerful to reliably attack aligned text models: even when current NLP-based attacks fail, we can find adversarial inputs with brute force. As a result, the failure of current attacks should not be seen as proof that aligned text models remain aligned under adversarial inputs. However the recent trend in large-scale ML models is multimodal models that allow users to provide images that influence the text that is generated. We show these models can be easily attacked, i.e., induced to perform arbitrary un-aligned behavior through adversarial perturbation of the input image. We conjecture that improved NLP attacks may demonstrate this same level of adversarial control over text-only models.

Model distillation is frequently proposed as a technique to reduce the privacy leakage of machine learning. These empirical privacy defenses rely on the intuition that distilled ``student'' models protect the privacy of training data, as they only interact with this data indirectly through a ``teacher'' model. In this work, we design membership inference attacks to systematically study the privacy provided by knowledge distillation to both the teacher and student training sets. Our new attacks show that distillation alone provides only limited privacy across a number of domains. We explain the success of our attacks on distillation by showing that membership inference attacks on a private dataset can succeed even if the target model is never queried on any actual training points, but only on inputs whose predictions are highly influenced by training data. Finally, we show that our attacks are strongest when student and teacher sets are similar, or when the attacker can poison the teacher set.

Modern neural language models that are widely used in various NLP tasks risk memorizing sensitive information from their training data. Understanding this memorization is important in real world applications and also from a learning-theoretical perspective. An open question in previous studies of language model memorization is how to filter out ``common'' memorization. In fact, most memorization criteria strongly correlate with the number of occurrences in the training set, capturing memorized familiar phrases, public knowledge, templated texts, or other repeated data. We formulate a notion of counterfactual memorization which characterizes how a model's predictions change if a particular document is omitted during training. We identify and study counterfactually-memorized training examples in standard text datasets. We estimate the influence of each memorized training example on the validation set and on generated texts, showing how this can provide direct evidence of the source of memorization at test time.

Property inference attacks allow an adversary to extract global properties of the training dataset from a machine learning model. Such attacks have privacy implications for data owners sharing their datasets to train machine learning models. Several existing approaches for property inference attacks against deep neural networks have been proposed [1] –[3], but they all rely on the attacker training a large number of shadow models, which induces a large computational overhead.In this paper, we consider the setting of property inference attacks in which the attacker can poison a subset of the training dataset and query the trained target model. Motivated by our theoretical analysis of model confidences under poisoning, we design an efficient property inference attack, SNAP, which obtains higher attack success and requires lower amounts of poisoning than the state-of-the-art poisoning-based property inference attack by Mahloujifar et al. [3]. For example, on the Census dataset, SNAP achieves 34% higher success rate than [3] while being 56.5× faster. We also extend our attack to infer whether a certain property was present at all during training and estimate the exact proportion of a property of interest efficiently. We evaluate our attack on several properties of varying proportions from four datasets and demonstrate SNAP’s generality and effectiveness.

A large body of research has shown that machine learning models are vulnerable to membership inference (MI) attacks that violate the privacy of the participants in the training data. Most MI research focuses on the case of a single standalone model, while production machine-learning platforms often update models over time, on data that often shifts in distribution, giving the attacker more information. This paper proposes new attacks that take advantage of one or more model updates to improve MI. A key part of our approach is to leverage rich information from standalone MI attacks mounted separately against the original and updated models, and to combine this information in specific ways to improve attack effectiveness. We propose a set of combination functions and tuning methods for each, and present both analytical and quantitative justification for various options. Our results on four public datasets show that our attacks are effective at using update information to give the adversary a significant advantage over attacks on standalone models, but also compared to a prior MI attack that takes advantage of model updates in a related machine-unlearning setting. We perform the first measurements of the impact of distribution shift on MI attacks with model updates, and show that a more drastic distribution shift results in significantly higher MI risk than a gradual shift. We also show that our attacks are effective at auditing differentially private fine tuning. We make our code public on Github: https://github.com/stanleykywu/model-updates.

We introduce a new class of attacks on machine learning models. We show that an adversary who can poison a training dataset can cause models trained on this dataset to leak significant private details of training points belonging to other parties. Our active inference attacks connect two independent lines of work targeting the integrity and privacy of machine learning training data.

Machine learning models trained on private datasets have been shown to leak their private data. Recent work has found that the average data point is rarely leaked---it is often the outlier samples that are subject to memorization and, consequently, leakage. We demonstrate and analyze an Onion Effect of memorization: removing the "layer" of outlier points that are most vulnerable to a privacy attack exposes a new layer of previously-safe points to the same attack. We perform several experiments that are consistent with this hypothesis. For example, we show that for membership inference attacks, when the layer of easiest-to-attack examples is removed, another layer below becomes easy-to-attack. The existence of this effect has various consequences. For example, it suggests that proposals to defend against memorization without training with rigorous privacy guarantees are unlikely to be effective. Further, it suggests that privacy-enhancing technologies such as machine unlearning could actually harm the privacy of other users.

Machine learning systems are deployed in critical settings, but they might fail in unexpected ways, impacting the accuracy of their predictions. Poisoning attacks against machine learning induce adversarial modification of data used by a machine learning algorithm to selectively change its output when it is deployed. In this work, we introduce a novel data poisoning attack called a subpopulation attack, which is particularly relevant when datasets are large and diverse. We design a modular framework for subpopulation attacks, instantiate it with different building blocks, and show that the attacks are effective for a variety of datasets and machine learning models. We further optimize the attacks in continuous domains using influence functions and gradient optimization methods. Compared to existing backdoor poisoning attacks, subpopulation attacks have the advantage of inducing misclassification in naturally distributed data points at inference time, making the attacks extremely stealthy. We also show that our attack strategy can be used to improve upon existing targeted attacks. We prove that, under some assumptions, subpopulation attacks are impossible to defend against, and empirically demonstrate the limitations of existing defenses against our attacks, highlighting the difficulty of protecting machine learning against this threat.

Abstract Secure channel establishment protocols such as Transport Layer Security (TLS) are some of the most important cryptographic protocols, enabling the encryption of Internet traffic. Reducing latency (the number of interactions between parties before encrypted data can be transmitted) in such protocols has become an important design goal to improve user experience. The most important protocols addressing this goal are TLS 1.3, the latest TLS version standardized in 2018 to replace the widely deployed TLS 1.2, and Quick UDP Internet Connections (QUIC), a secure transport protocol from Google that is implemented in the Chrome browser. There have been a number of formal security analyses for TLS 1.3 and QUIC, but their security, when layered with their underlying transport protocols, cannot be easily compared. Our work is the first to thoroughly compare the security and availability properties of these protocols. Toward this goal, we develop novel security models that permit “layered” security analysis. In addition to the standard goals of server authentication and data confidentiality and integrity, we consider the goals of IP spoofing prevention, key exchange packet integrity, secure channel header integrity, and reset authentication, which capture a range of practical threats not usually taken into account by existing security models that focus mainly on the cryptographic cores of the protocols. Equipped with our new models we provide a detailed comparison of three low-latency layered protocols: TLS 1.3 over TCP Fast Open (TFO), QUIC over UDP, and QUIC[TLS] (a new design for QUIC that uses TLS 1.3 key exchange) over UDP. In particular, we show that TFO’s cookie mechanism does provably achieve the security goal of IP spoofing prevention. Additionally, we find several new availability attacks that manipulate the early key exchange packets without being detected by the communicating parties. By including packet-level attacks in our analysis, our results shed light on how the reliability, flow control, and congestion control of the above layered protocols compare, in adversarial settings. We hope that our models will help protocol designers in their future protocol analyses and that our results will help practitioners better understand the advantages and limitations of secure channel establishment protocols.

We investigate whether Differentially Private SGD offers better privacy in practice than what is guaranteed by its state-of-the-art analysis. We do so via novel data poisoning attacks, which we show correspond to realistic privacy attacks. While previous work (Ma et al., arXiv 2019) proposed this connection between differential privacy and data poisoning as a defense against data poisoning, our use as a tool for understanding the privacy of a specific mechanism is new. More generally, our work takes a quantitative, empirical approach to understanding the privacy afforded by specific implementations of differentially private algorithms that we believe has the potential to complement and influence analytical work on differential privacy.

Motivated by settings in which predictive models may be required to be non-discriminatory with respect to certain attributes (such as race), but even collecting the sensitive attribute may be forbidden or restricted, we initiate the study of fair learning under the constraint of differential privacy. Our first algorithm is a private implementation of the equalized odds post-processing approach of (Hardt et al., 2016). This algorithm is appealingly simple, but must be able to use protected group membership explicitly at test time, which can be viewed as a form of “disparate treatment”. Our second algorithm is a differentially private version of the oracle-efficient in-processing approach of (Agarwal et al., 2018) which is more complex but need not have access to protected group membership at test time. We identify new tradeoffs between fairness, accuracy, and privacy that emerge only when requiring all three properties, and show that these tradeoffs can be milder if group membership may be used at test time. We conclude with a brief experimental evaluation.

Connected vehicle applications such as autonomous intersections and intelligent traffic signals have shown great promises in improving transportation safety and efficiency. However, security is a major concern in these systems, as vehicles and surrounding infrastructures communicate through ad-hoc networks. In this paper, we will first review security vulnerabilities in connected vehicle applications. We will then introduce and discuss some of the defense mechanisms at network and system levels, including (1) the Security Credential Management System (SCMS) proposed by the United States Department of Transportation, (2) an intrusion detection system (IDS) that we are developing and its application on collaborative adaptive cruise control, and (3) a partial consensus mechanism and its application on lane merging. These mechanisms can assist to improve the security of connected vehicle applications.

As machine learning becomes widely used for automated decisions, attackers have strong incentives to manipulate the results and models generated by machine learning algorithms. In this paper, we perform the first systematic study of poisoning attacks and their countermeasures for linear regression models. In poisoning attacks, attackers deliberately influence the training data to manipulate the results of a predictive model. We propose a theoretically-grounded optimization framework specifically designed for linear regression and demonstrate its effectiveness on a range of datasets and models. We also introduce a fast statistical attack that requires limited knowledge of the training process. Finally, we design a new principled defense method that is highly resilient against all poisoning attacks. We provide formal guarantees about its convergence and an upper bound on the effect of poisoning attacks when the defense is deployed. We evaluate extensively our attacks and defenses on three realistic datasets from health care, loan assessment, and real estate domains.

We study collaborative adaptive cruise control as a representative application for safety services provided by autonomous cars. We provide a detailed analysis of attacks that can be conducted by a motivated attacker targeting the collaborative adaptive cruise control algorithm, by influencing the acceleration reported by another car, or the local LIDAR and RADAR sensors. The attacks have a strong impact on passenger comfort, efficiency and safety, with two of such attacks being able to cause crashes. We also present two detection methods rooted in physical-based constraints and machine learning algorithms. We show the effectiveness of these solutions through simulations and discuss their limitations.