cs.CROct 4, 2026

TARE: Weigh a Never-Poisoned Twin Before Reading Backdoor-Defense Costs

Authors: Ruizhi Xu, Wei Xu, Sibo Zhu

Abstract

Backdoor-defense leaderboards print a clean-accuracy drop and read it as removal cost. Measured on the poisoned victim alone, the drop cannot separate removal from what the defense does to any model, and inherits the victim's start, which for three of BackdoorBench's sixteen attacks is a configuration file: WaNet, BPP and Input-Aware ship a MultiStepLR that never fires, so their victims never anneal and are the least accurate in 30/31 public CIFAR cells at ≤\leq5%. On PreAct-ResNet18, fine-tuning-family defenses return a low start to their own level, so there the published cost is negative, the benchmark's rating clips the "gain" to zero, and 2 of 48 citing defense papers we read rest a no-cost claim on those cells; TSBD and CGD, re-run with their code, "gain" on a never-poisoned model too. A 2×22\times2 editing only that scheduler line isolates the cause, its swapped arms self-registered before they ran: the sign of the fine-tuning family's clean-model cost reverses both ways while its published gain on the annealed victim only shrinks toward zero, 44/44 seeds following the schedule, replicated on BPP, FT-SAM, CIFAR-100 and VGG19-BN and induced in a second toolkit. TARE runs the same defense on a never-poisoned twin of the same recipe, schedule and seed (on BackdoorBench, ≤\leq10 poisoned images, admitted only below 5% attack success); what the twin loses is the tare. On the BadNets grid seven of eight defenses charge the twin (Neural Cleanse only where its detector fires), +0.13 (fine-tuning) to +5.70 points (I-BAU); the eighth, ABL, destroys it. Within an attack the start cancels from rankings, so the tare re-orders nothing there; what poisoning adds beyond it is printed under two estimators and not corrected, its removal share unidentified. We ship the three-key patch, a signed tare column (7 attacks ×\times 8 defenses) and TARE-Z, a twin-free estimator for seed-stable defenses.

Explore similar work

May 27, 2026cs.LG

Density-aware Sample-specific Attack

Despite recent progress in backdoor attacks, existing methods remain susceptible to post-training defenses that erase the backdoor through fine-tuning or pruning. We revisit the core objectives of backdoor attacks and derive principled criteria characterizing optimal sample-specific trigger construction under a Bayes-optimal model of the victim's training. Our analysis reveals that both attack success and clean-accuracy preservation are simultaneously optimized when triggered samples are steered into low-density regions of the clean data distribution, a distributional condition that controls all moments of the poisoned distribution at once rather than a handful of input-space summary statistics. We introduce a bilevel optimization framework that estimates density ratios via conditional time-score matching and optimizes a mixture-model objective to place triggered samples in these sparse regions. Extensive evaluations on MNIST, CIFAR-10, GTSRB, and TinyImageNet demonstrate that our method achieves above 99% attack success rate before defense and retains 50--85 percentage points higher post-defense ASR than the strongest baselines under fine-tuning defenses. Against neuron-pruning defenses, the method exhibits complete immunity, with zero neurons identified for removal across all pruning thresholds. These results expose a fundamental gap in current defense paradigms and underscore the need for defenses that operate beyond the support of the clean distribution.
Jul 7, 2026cs.LG

Two Sides of the Same Coin: Learning the Backdoor to Remove the Backdoor

The community has recently developed various training-time defenses to counter neural backdoors introduced through data poisoning. In light of the observation that a model learns poisonous samples responsible for the backdoor easier than benign samples, these approaches either use a fixed threshold of the training loss for splitting or iteratively learn a reference model as an oracle for identifying benign samples. In particular, the latter has proven effective for anti-backdoor learning. Our method, HARVEY, leverages a similar yet crucially different technique: learning an oracle for poisonous rather than benign samples. Learning a backdoored reference model is significantly easier than learning a reference model on benign data. Consequently, we can identify poisonous samples much more accurately than related work identifies benign samples. This crucial difference enables near-perfect backdoor removal as we demonstrate in our evaluation. HARVEY substantially outperforms related approaches across attack types, datasets, and architectures, lowering the attack success rate to the very minimum at a negligible loss in natural accuracy. The figure below shows an overview of our methods working principle.
May 2, 2026cs.CR

Checkerboard: A Simple, Effective, Efficient and Learning-free Clean Label Backdoor Attack with Low Poisoning Budget

Backdoor attacks threaten the deep learning supply chain by poisoning a small fraction of the training data so that a model behaves normally on clean inputs but misclassifies trigger-carrying inputs to an attacker-chosen target class. Clean-label backdoor attacks are especially dangerous because poisoned samples remain label-consistent and are therefore harder to detect. Yet existing clean-label attacks typically rely on expensive optimization, surrogate-model training, or nontrivial data access. We present Checkerboard, a theoretically grounded, learning-free clean-label backdoor attack that is effective, efficient, and simple to implement. From a linear separability formulation, we derive a checkerboard trigger in closed form, removing the need for surrogate-model training and trigger optimization. For texture-rich datasets, we introduce Complexity-driven Sample Selection, which uses only target-class data to improve trigger-to-background contrast by selecting low-complexity images for poisoning. Across four benchmark datasets, Checkerboard outperforms 8 baseline attacks and achieves state-of-the-art performance under low poisoning budgets. For example, on CIFAR-10, under a trigger perturbation budget of 10/25510/255, poisoning 20 training samples achieves 99.99%99.99\% Attack Success Rate (ASR). On ImageNet-100, a poisoning rate of only 0.46%0.46\% yields over 94%94\% ASR without degrading clean accuracy. The proposed attack also remains effective against state-of-the-art backdoor defenses and shows strong resistance to adaptive defenses.