In this paper, we study the problem of consistency in the context of adversarial examples. Specifically, we tackle the following question: can surrogate losses still be used as a proxy for minimizing the $0/1$ loss in the presence of an adversary that alters the inputs at test-time? Different from the standard classification task, this question cannot be reduced to a point-wise minimization problem, and calibration needs not to be sufficient to ensure consistency. In this paper, we expose some pathological behaviors specific to the adversarial problem, and show that no convex surrogate loss can be consistent or calibrated in this context. It is therefore necessary to design another class of surrogate functions that can be used to solve the adversarial consistency issue. As a first step towards designing such a class, we identify sufficient and necessary conditions for a surrogate loss to be calibrated in both the adversarial and standard settings. Finally, we give some directions for building a class of losses that could be consistent in the adversarial framework.

\emph{Is there a classifier that ensures optimal robustness against all adversarial attacks?} This paper tackles this question by adopting a game-theoretic point of view. We present the adversarial attacks and defenses problem as an \emph{infinite} zero-sum game where classical results (\emph{e.g.} Nash or Sion theorems) do not apply. We demonstrate the non-existence of a Nash equilibrium in our game when the classifier and the Adversary are both deterministic, hence giving a negative answer to the above question in the deterministic regime. Nonetheless, the question remains open in the randomized regime. We tackle this problem by showing that any deterministic classifier can be outperformed by a randomized one. This gives arguments for using randomization, and leads us to a simple method for building randomized classifiers that are robust to state-or-the-art adversarial attacks. Empirical results validate our theoretical analysis, and show that our defense method considerably outperforms Adversarial Training against strong adaptive attacks, by achieving 0.55 accuracy under adaptive PGD-attack on CIFAR10, compared to 0.42 for Adversarial training.