SecureAFL: Secure Asynchronous Federated Learning
Organizations: University of Louisville, Louisville, USA · Northeastern University, Shenyang, China · National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore · University of North Texas, Denton, USA
Abstract
Federated learning (FL) enables multiple clients to collaboratively train a global machine learning model via a server without sharing their private training data. In traditional FL, the system follows a synchronous approach, where the server waits for model updates from numerous clients before aggregating them to update the global model. However, synchronous FL is hindered by the straggler problem. To address this, the asynchronous FL architecture allows the server to update the global model immediately upon receiving any client's local model update. Despite its advantages, the decentralized nature of asynchronous FL makes it vulnerable to poisoning attacks. Several defenses tailored for asynchronous FL have been proposed, but these mechanisms remain susceptible to advanced attacks or rely on unrealistic server assumptions. In this paper, we introduce SecureAFL, an innovative framework designed to secure asynchronous FL against poisoning attacks. SecureAFL improves the robustness of asynchronous FL by detecting and discarding anomalous updates while estimating the contributions of missing clients. Additionally, it utilizes Byzantine-robust aggregation techniques, such as coordinate-wise median, to integrate the received and estimated updates. Extensive experiments on various real-world datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of SecureAFL.
Figures & tables
| Notation | Definition |
| Number of clients | |
| Global model at the th training round | |
| Local model update from client at round | |
| Estimated local model update from client at round | |
| Delay of client ’s local model update | |
| Lipschitz factor for client at round |
| Representative methods | Batch update or single update | Delay or no delay | |
| Synchronous FL | Median ( Yin et al., 2018 ) , Trimmed-mean ( Yin et al., 2018 ) , Krum ( Blanchard et al., 2017 ) , FLAME ( Nguyen et al., 2022b ) , Baybfed ( Kumari et al., 2023 ) , Bucketing ( Karimireddy et al., 2022 ) , Foolsgold ( Fung et al., 2020 ) , DnC ( Shejwalkar and Houmansadr, 2021 ) , RFLBAT ( Wang et al., 2022b ) , SignGuard ( Xu et al., 2022 ) , FLShield ( Kabir et al., 2024 ) , FreqFed ( Fereidooni et al., 2024 ) , BackdoorIndicator ( Li and Dai, 2024 ) , FLTrust ( Cao et al., 2021a ) , GAA ( Pan et al., 2020 ) , FLARE ( Wang et al., 2022a ) , FoundationFL ( Fang et al., 2025b ) | Batch update | No delay |
| Semi-asynchronous FL | Catalyst ( Cox et al., 2024 ) , PoiSAFL ( Pang et al., 2025 ) | Batch update | Delay |
| Asynchronous FL | Kardam ( Damaskinos et al., 2018 ) , BASGD ( Yang and Li, 2021 ) , Sageflow ( Park et al., 2021 ) , Zeno++ ( Xie et al., 2020 ) , AFLGuard ( Fang et al., 2022 ) , AsyncDefender ( Bai et al., 2025 ) , SecureAFL (Ours) | Single update | Delay |
| Layer | Size |
| Input | |
| Convolution + ReLU | |
| Max Pooling | |
| Convolution + ReLU | |
| Max Pooling | |
| Fully Connected + ReLU | 100 |
| Method | No attack | Signflip | Gaussian | Min-Max | Adaptive |
| AsyncSGD | 0.17 | 0.29 | 1.10 | 0.36 | 0.33 |
| Kardam | 0.18 | 0.28 | 0.19 | 0.55 | 0.24 |
| BASGD | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.19 | inf | 0.20 |
| Zeno++ | 0.17 | inf | 0.24 | inf | inf |
| AFLGuard | 0.18 | 0.43 | 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.26 |
| SecureAFL | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.17 |
| No attack | Labelflip | Signflip | Gaussian | Scaling | DBA | PGD | Neurotoxin | 3DFed | Min-Max | Adaptive | |
| 0.4 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.14 | 0.19/0.02 | 0.16/0.02 | 0.17/0.07 | 0.19/0.08 | 0.19/0.10 | 0.22 | 0.23 |
| 0.6 | 0.15 | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.18/0.08 | 0.17/0.03 | 0.19/0.10 | 0.20/0.01 | 0.17/0.06 | 0.20 | 0.23 |
| 0.8 | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.18/0.07 | 0.17/0.05 | 0.16/0.07 | 0.15/0.06 | 0.17/0.03 | 0.15 | 0.18 |
| Variant | No attack | Labelflip | Signflip | Gaussian | Scaling | DBA | PGD | Neurotoxin | 3DFed | Min-Max | Adaptive |
| Variant I | 0.12 | 0.14 | 0.15 | 0.14 | 0.40/0.36 | 0.34/0.33 | 0.40/0.19 | 0.30/0.22 | 0.38/0.34 | 0.35 | 0.35 |
| Variant II | 0.17 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.18 | 0.72/0.90 | 0.44/0.58 | 0.34/0.38 | 0.37/0.34 | 0.35/0.40 | 0.87 | 0.90 |
| Variant III | 0.16 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.20 | 0.34/0.41 | 0.68/0.53 | 0.30/0.25 | 0.29/0.25 | 0.46/0.47 | 0.90 | 0.90 |
| Variant IV | 0.41 | 0.56 | 0.66 | 0.47 | 0.57/0.49 | 0.53/0.53 | 0.59/0.49 | 0.48/0.42 | 0.58/0.46 | 0.45 | 0.63 |
| SecureAFL | 0.12 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.18/0.07 | 0.17/0.05 | 0.16/0.07 | 0.15/0.06 | 0.17/0.03 | 0.15 | 0.18 |
| Round | Relative estimation error |
| 200–300 | 0.81 |
| 300–400 | 0.72 |
| 400–500 | 0.68 |
| 500–600 | 0.65 |
| 600–700 | 0.61 |
| 700–Convergence | 0.59 |
| Method | 50 clients | 100 clients | 300 clients |
| AsyncSGD | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.04 |
| Zeno++ | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.05 |
| AFLGuard | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.08 |
| SecureAFL | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| Method | 140,000 parameters | 500,000 parameters | 1,000,000 parameters |
| AsyncSGD | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 |
| Zeno++ | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| AFLGuard | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.08 |
| SecureAFL | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.06 |
| Dataset | No attack | Labelflip | Signflip | Gaussian | Scaling | DBA | PGD | Neurotoxin | 3DFed | Min-Max | Adaptive |
| Fashion-MNIST | 0.24 | 0.25 | 0.33 | 0.31 | 0.38/0.44 | 0.34/0.43 | 0.33/0.29 | 0.32/0.27 | 0.34/0.31 | 0.39 | 0.43 |
| CIFAR-10 | 0.26 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 0.49 | 0.58/0.37 | 0.53/0.42 | 0.55/0.44 | 0.52/0.40 | 0.57/0.43 | 0.55 | 0.66 |
| CIFAR-100 | 0.50 | 0.58 | 0.57 | 0.66 | 0.73/0.53 | 0.74/0.55 | 0.71/0.67 | 0.73/0.44 | 0.72/0.57 | 0.93 | 0.89 |
| Tiny-ImageNet | 0.63 | 0.71 | 0.75 | 0.71 | 0.70/0.15 | 0.72/0.18 | 0.69/0.12 | 0.70/0.15 | 0.71/0.15 | 0.73 | 0.72 |
| Udacity | 0.18 | – | 0.41 | 0.32 | – | – | – | – | – | 0.29 | 0.33 |
Federated Learning
Federated learning trains shared models across data holders without requiring them to pool their raw data.
See all 921 papers