Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hanna Foerster
dblp:380/0224
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Security and privacy · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Network and information security
3 papers |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 28% Systems and software security · 24% Digital forensics and information hiding · 24% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 100% | |
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Machine learning and data management · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Digital forensics and information hiding › copyright protection
image copyright protection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | LightShed: Defeating Perturbation-based Image Copyright Protections · USENIX Security Symposium 2025 |
Privacy and data protection › statistical database privacy
perturbation-based protection |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | LightShed: Defeating Perturbation-based Image Copyright Protections · USENIX Security Symposium 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
model stealing |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Beyond Slow Signs in High-fidelity Model Extraction · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning and data management
inference serving |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Hardware and Software Platform Inference · ICML 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack
adversarial perturbation |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | LightShed: Defeating Perturbation-based Image Copyright Protections · USENIX Security Symposium 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
numerical pattern analysis · 2.6black-box classification · 2.6image processing · 0.9adversarial perturbation · 0.9cryptanalytical parameter extraction · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Hardware and Software Platform InferenceabstractIt is now a common business practice to buy access to large language model (LLM) inference rather than self-host, because of significant upfront hardware infrastructure and energy costs. However, as a buyer, there is no mechanism to verify the authenticity of the advertised service including the serving hardware platform, e.g. that it is actually being served using an NVIDIA H100. Furthermore, there are reports suggesting that model providers may deliver models that differ slightly from the advertised ones, often to make them run on less expensive hardware. That way, a client pays premium for a capable model access on more expensive hardware, yet ends up being served by a (potentially less capable) cheaper model on cheaper hardware. In this paper we introduce ***hardware and software platform inference (HSPI)*** -- a method for identifying the underlying GPU architecture and software stack of a (black-box) machine learning model solely based on its input-output behavior. Our method leverages the inherent differences of various GPU architectures and compilers to distinguish between different GPU types and software stacks. By analyzing the numerical patterns in the model's outputs, we propose a classification framework capable of accurately identifying the GPU used for model inference as well as the underlying software configuration. Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of inferring GPU type from black-box models. We evaluate HSPI against models served on different real hardware and find that in a white-box setting we can distinguish between different GPUs with between 83.9% and 100% accuracy. Even in a black-box setting we are able to achieve results that are up to three times higher than random guess accuracy. Hanna Foerster, Robert Mullins 0001, Ilia Shumailov |
ICML | 2 |
| 2025 | LightShed: Defeating Perturbation-based Image Copyright Protections
Hanna Foerster, Sasha Behrouzi, Phillip Rieger, Murtuza Jadliwala, Ahmad-Reza Sadeghi |
USENIX Security Symposium | 1 |
| 2024 | Beyond Slow Signs in High-fidelity Model ExtractionabstractDeep neural networks, costly to train and rich in intellectual property value, are
increasingly threatened by model extraction attacks that compromise their confiden-
tiality. Previous attacks have succeeded in reverse-engineering model parameters
up to a precision of float64 for models trained on random data with at most three
hidden layers using cryptanalytical techniques. However, the process was identified
to be very time consuming and not feasible for larger and deeper models trained on
standard benchmarks. Our study evaluates the feasibility of parameter extraction
methods of Carlini et al. [1] further enhanced by Canales-Martínez et al. [2] for
models trained on standard benchmarks. We introduce a unified codebase that
integrates previous methods and reveal that computational tools can significantly
influence performance. We develop further optimisations to the end-to-end attack
and improve the efficiency of extracting weight signs by up to 14.8 times com-
pared to former methods through the identification of easier and harder to extract
neurons. Contrary to prior assumptions, we identify extraction of weights, not
extraction of weight signs, as the critical bottleneck. With our improvements, a
16,721 parameter model with 2 hidden layers trained on MNIST is extracted within
only 98 minutes compared to at least 150 minutes previously. Finally, addressing
methodological deficiencies observed in previous studies, we propose new ways of
robust benchmarking for future model extraction attacks. Hanna Foerster, Robert Mullins 0001, Ilia Shumailov, Jamie Hayes |
NeurIPS | 1 |