Papers for

privacy compliance teams

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

AI empathy shapes user privacy attitudes and sensitive sharing

How Does Perceived Empathy From AI Chatbots Shape Users' Privacy Attitudes, Behaviors, and Needs?

Abstract: Prior research suggests that some dimensions of AI empathy may increase users' disclosure to chatbots, posing growing privacy risks as chatbots become more capable of empathic interaction. Yet this work often conceptualizes AI empathy narrowly, leaving users' own definitions and their broader privacy experiences unexplored. We interviewed 21 AI Chatbot users about what AI empathy meant to them and how it shaped their privacy attitudes, behaviors, and needs. Participants characterized empathy through five components--understanding, resonating, caring, expressing, and helping. Most participants viewed resonating and caring as essential components of human empathy but absent from AI empathy. Yet AI's contextual, in-depth understanding and helpfulness still encouraged highly sensitive disclosure. This highlights that AI empathy can endanger users' privacy without necessarily making AI seem human. Participants also desired varied forms and levels of empathy, each associated with distinct privacy needs. We offer actionable recommendations for designing privacy-enhancing mechanisms for empathic AI interactions.

Wed 28 OctHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
People share more personal information with AI chatbots when the bots seem to understand and help them, even if the bots don’t feel real empathy like humans do. The study found that users think real empathy includes caring and resonating, but AI mainly shows understanding and helpfulness. This can still lead to privacy risks because users may disclose sensitive details. The researchers also found that users want different levels and kinds of empathy from AI, which affect their privacy concerns.
Open → 2610.38802v1

Privacy impact assessments face challenges in real world use worldwide

The State of the Practice in Privacy Impact Assessments: Understanding the Professionals' Perspectives, Experiences, and Current Procedures

Abstract: Organisations frequently utilise Privacy Impact Assessments (PIAs), Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs), or even Fundamental Rights Impact Assessments (FRIAs) to identify and evaluate potential risks and possible infringements of fundamental rights. While the adoption of PIAs and DPIAs has grown significantly in recent years, robust scientific evidence regarding their operational challenges, implementation strategies, and tangible benefits remains scarce. In particular, empirical research conducted post-enactment of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is notably limited -- especially studies that directly interview professionals about their PIA/DPIA practices or their engagement with FRIAs. To do so, in this paper we leveraged semi-structured interviews to elicit privacy professionals' perspectives on PIA/DPIA activities and analysed the responses using reflexive thematic analysis. As a result, this work provides a comprehensive thematic framework for the field, offering a rich and thick description of professionals' views and experiences. In total, 26 participants from 17 countries were interviewed, revealing how they plan and conduct PIAs/DPIAs, including how they assess trade-offs, the benefits and challenges they perceive, and how they view the interplay between PIAs/DPIAs and the EU AI Act. Among the main findings were low adherence to established DPIA methodologies; differences and similarities between PIAs and DPIAs; a perceived neglect of data subjects' interests during DPIA processes; discussions on building FRIAs on top of DPIAs; and the potential for holistic impact assessments, though accompanied by concerns regarding assessment fatigue. Thus, this study informs privacy professionals about real-world challenges and experiences of PIA/DPIA implementation, and guides researchers toward future research directions.

Wed 28 OctComputers and SocietyCryptography and Security
The gist
Many organizations use privacy impact assessments to find risks in how they handle personal data, but how these assessments are done varies a lot. The authors talked to privacy professionals from many countries to learn how they plan and carry out these assessments. They found people often don’t follow official methods closely, and sometimes don’t fully consider the rights of individuals. The study also looks at how these assessments connect to new regulations like the EU AI Act, and how combining different types of impact assessments could help but might also cause extra work.
Open → 2610.38543v1

Membership inference risks in on-policy self-distillation revealed

OP-Print: Tracing Membership Imprints in On-Policy Self-Distillation

Abstract: On-policy distillation has been widely adopted for alleviating the distribution mismatch of off-policy distillation. Self-distillation further removes the need for an external teacher by using the student's own outputs, enhanced with extra context or demonstrations, as supervision. This teacher-free design makes on-policy self-distillation practical, yet its privacy risks remain largely unexplored. In particular, using two coupled views of the same training example may strengthen its memorization. Motivated by this, we present the first study of membership inference attacks against on-policy self-distillation. We investigate both gray-box and black-box threat models and propose a unified attack framework, named OP-Print. OP-Print builds on our finding that the supervision imprint in on-policy self-distillation is sparse and structured, concentrating on uncertainty-sensitive correction sites rather than across the entire rollout. Exploiting this property, we construct attack signals tailored to the two access levels: in the gray-box setting, OP-Print directly aggregates the privileged teacher-student residual correction along the same rollout; in the black-box setting, it measures restart-based output-basin stability as an observable surrogate for the hidden correction process. Across diverse models and distillation schemes, all baseline attacks remain essentially at random guessing even under gray-box access, whereas OP-Print is broadly validated to be effective in both gray-box and black-box settings.

Thu 22 OctMachine LearningCryptography and Security
The gist
When computer models teach themselves by using their own past predictions (on-policy self-distillation), they may unintentionally memorize who was in their training data. This paper shows that such self-teaching methods leave behind distinct patterns that can be detected by clever attacks, even when outsiders have limited information. The authors developed a new attack approach called OP-Print that finds these hidden memory clues more effectively than previous methods. Their results highlight potential privacy concerns in this teaching style.
Open → 2610.31616v1

Privacy loss during diffusion model sampling depends on method

Privacy Accounting for Empirical Denoisers

Abstract: Diffusion models have emerged as the foundation of modern generative systems, yet their high memorization capacity raises privacy concerns. While differentially private (DP) training provides formal guarantees, it comes at a cost in sample quality. In this work, we study a complementary question: how much privacy loss is incurred during the sampling process itself? Directly analyzing modern neural denoisers is challenging because their sensitivity to a single training example is generally intractable. To overcome this challenge, we construct and analyze a clipped privacy-accountable empirical denoiser, a training-free estimator of the Bayes-optimal denoiser, whose per-step sensitivity can be computed explicitly, allowing each denoising step to be a Gaussian mechanism. This perspective enables privacy accounting under Gaussian DP when each training example contributes to each denoising step, and under $f$-DP trade-off functions when each generated sample uses a single randomly subsampled block of the training data. We report every $(\varepsilon, δ)$ guarantee as a certified upper bound from a privacy loss distribution accountant, and use a cumulant-based Edgeworth approximation as a fast diagnostic, characterizing where it is reliable and where it becomes anti-conservative. We also analyze the privacy loss along the denoising trajectory and show that it grows steeply near the critical window in which semantic content is formed. This observation motivates hybrid samplers that use the private empirical denoiser through the formative steps where it remains a faithful proxy for the neural denoiser, then switch to a public neural denoiser for the remaining refinement. Our results on CIFAR-10 and CelebA-64 show that the privacy of diffusion models depends not only on the training procedure, but also on sampling-time design choices such as subsampling, stopping time, and hybrid denoising.

Tue 20 OctMachine LearningCryptography and Security
The gist
Diffusion models are popular tools that create images, but they can remember details from their training data, raising privacy concerns. The paper investigates how much private information is revealed during the image generation process itself, not just during training. The authors build a safe way to measure privacy loss step-by-step by using a special, simpler version that can be analyzed exactly. They find privacy loss increases sharply at key moments when important parts of the image form, suggesting new ways to mix private and public methods for better privacy. Their tests on common datasets show that privacy depends on how the model is used at generation time, not just how it was trained.
Open → 2610.27710v1

When ai companies should tell police about private chats

When Is Disclosing Private Conversations with AI to the State Justified? Proactive Referral Policies of Major U.S. AI Companies through the Lens of Contextual Integrity

Abstract: AI companies engage in "proactive referral": notifying law enforcement, without a government request, of user conversations they judge dangerous. This poses a dilemma: referral may expose people who merely confided dangerous thoughts to an AI to investigation, while not referring may leave actual violence unprevented. This study asks under what conditions proactive referral can be justified and to what extent companies' public policies disclose those conditions. Drawing on contextual integrity theory and the norms governing exceptional information sharing in confidential counseling, online posts, and private communications, the study develops eight justification criteria classified as required, presumptive, or recommended. Three evaluators analyzed 27 public documents from six major U.S. AI companies using the criteria applicable to corporate policies. No company clarified whether broad sharing provisions or narrower safety notices took precedence, and assessments of referral scope depended on which provisions were given precedence. No company disclosed the specific factual thresholds and exception conditions governing referral decisions, or whether users would be notified afterward. The study turns contextual integrity into a stage-by-stage framework for proactive referral, shows that policy documents must be read in light of their relationships, and proposes policy elements for keeping proactive referral a narrow exception disclosed in advance.

Sun 18 OctComputers and Society
The gist
Sometimes, AI companies tell the police about user chats that seem dangerous without being asked. This can help stop violence but might also cause problems by exposing people who just shared scary thoughts with AI. The authors studied when this is okay and found that no major AI company clearly explains their rules or lets users know when this happens. They suggest better policies that clearly set limits and tell users in advance.
Open → 2610.25169v1

Context changes test large language models on sharing private information

ConCI: A Controlled Counterfactual Benchmark for Contextual Integrity in LLMs

Abstract: Contextual integrity (CI) holds that the appropriateness of sharing personal information depends on the context of the information flow, not on the information alone. However, existing CI benchmarks often use independent scenarios that vary multiple CI parameters simultaneously and are dominated by inappropriate flows, making it unclear whether correct predictions reflect sensitivity to context or a general refusal tendency. We present ConCI, a controlled-counterfactual benchmark in which an anchor flow is paired with two counterfactuals that each modify a single CI parameter. The resulting triplet is scored jointly, with credit given only when all three flows are judged correctly. Built from six existing benchmarks, ConCI contains 1,592 flows in 556 triplets, is approximately label-balanced, and is validated by seven human annotators per flow. Across seven LLMs, many correct anchor predictions fail on at least one counterfactual, and even the strongest model errs on about a fifth of triplets. Furthermore, models perform near ceiling on inappropriate flows but weaker on appropriate ones, often continuing to judge a flow inappropriate even when a contextual change should make it appropriate. Larger models narrow this bias toward non-disclosure but do not eliminate it, and reasoning yields only modest gains.

Sat 17 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
People share personal information differently depending on the situation, but existing tests for AI models don’t clearly show if models understand this context or just say no to sharing. The authors created ConCI, a special test where each scenario is paired with two others that change only one thing at a time, making it easier to see if models really get the context. They found that even the best AI models often make mistakes, especially by not recognizing when it’s okay to share information after the situation changes. Bigger models improve but still struggle, and asking models to explain their answers helps only a little.
Open → 2610.24494v1

Mobile health apps collect sensitive data often without proper consent

Bad Diagnosis: Analyzing Consent and Data Collection Practices of Mobile Medical Apps

Abstract: Mobile health (mHealth) apps collect personally-identifiable information while handling uniquely sensitive medical data, ranging from mental health records to real-time glucose or heart rate monitoring -- yet they remain poorly understood at scale. We present the first comprehensive analysis of consent and data collection practices across 10,000+ mHealth apps on the Google Play Store, combining static analysis and privacy policy examination. We develop a rigorous operational definition to distinguish health apps from general wellness programs, and design a measurement framework to detect misuse of permissions and violations of consent. Our analyses reveal a troubling ecosystem: 69.15% of apps request at least one permission unrelated to their stated purpose, with over 52.9% apps requesting location data, and 50.5% and 34.9% apps requesting camera and microphone access, respectively -- despite no functional justification based on app descriptions and stated purposes. Most alarmingly, nearly 93% of apps fail to provide users with a consent form, directly violating regulatory requirements such as GDPR; and even among the remaining 7%, 1 in 14 demonstrate a gap between the obtained consent and collection of personally identifiable information. These findings demonstrate an urgent need for stronger enforcement of privacy regulations in mHealth apps. We plan to release our dataset and measurement tools for continued monitoring of this critical space.

Fri 16 OctHuman-Computer InteractionCryptography and SecurityComputers and Society
The gist
Mobile health apps often gather personal information, like location or microphone data, which they don’t explain or need based on their app description. The authors studied over 10,000 such apps and found most don’t provide users with proper consent forms, ignoring important privacy laws. This means many health apps might be collecting sensitive data without clearly telling users or asking for permission.
Open → 2610.23851v1

Behavioral forgetting does not guarantee privacy in machine unlearning

Behavioral Forgetting Is Not Privacy in Machine Unlearning

Abstract: Machine unlearning aims to remove targeted information from large language models, but existing evaluations often measure forgetting only on a designated benchmark distribution. We argue that such behavioral forgetting is an insufficient standard for privacy-oriented unlearning, and that evaluation should instead test whether forgetting persists across the access paths through which the same information may be recovered. We demonstrate this with a controlled case study of cross-lingual querying: across multiple multilingual model families, forgetting varies substantially when semantically equivalent information is queried in different languages and scripts. A single access path is therefore enough to expose a real gap between behavioral forgetting and information inaccessibility, motivating broader evaluation of access-path generalization and adversarial recoverability alongside in-distribution forgetting.

Thu 15 OctComputation and Language
The gist
When a model is told to forget certain information, it often only forgets how to answer questions in a specific way or language. The authors found that even if a model seems to have forgotten something in one language, it might still remember it when asked in another language or script. This means just testing forgetting through one type of question isn't enough to ensure privacy. They suggest checking many ways that hidden information might be recovered to truly verify if forgetting is complete.
Open → 2610.21799v1

Federated learning method improves knowledge removal in large language models

FIRM: Fisher-Informed Retention Merging for Federated LLM Unlearning

Abstract: Federated LLM unlearning addresses targeted knowledge removal when forget and retain data remain distributed across private clients and are inaccessible to the server. The resulting locally trained adapters encode conflicting objectives, making their aggregation fundamentally different from conventional federated optimization. A key failure mode is magnitude explosion, whereby unnormalized cross-client aggregation increases the merged update magnitude and degrades retained utility under stronger unlearning. We propose FIRM (Fisher-Informed Retention Merging), a single-round framework for stable and retention-aware server-side aggregation. FIRM uses client-local Fisher statistics as a unified sensitivity signal to construct a Fisher-normalized base merge and impose explicit control over retain-sensitive parameters. Its second-order retention projection admits a unique minimum-distance solution, while the corresponding dual scales with the number of retain clients rather than the model dimension. Experiments across WMDP, TOFU, and MUSE-HP using Zephyr-7B and Llama-3-8B show utility gains at comparable forgetting on WMDP and MUSE-HP, with metric-dependent trade-offs on TOFU. Controlled comparisons support benefits of the combined base merge and additional retention correction at selected operating points.

Thu 15 OctMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
When multiple users train language models together without sharing raw data, removing specific unwanted knowledge while keeping useful information is hard. The authors identified that simply combining local updates can cause the model to become unstable or forget too much useful content. They propose FIRM, a technique that uses special statistics from each user's training to carefully combine their updates, keeping the model stable and preserving knowledge meant to be retained. Experiments show FIRM balances forgetting unwanted knowledge and keeping useful information better than previous approaches.
Open → 2610.21720v1

Language embeddings can leak item and user identities in recommenders

Encoded but Exposed: Language Embeddings can Reveal More Than They Should in Recommender Systems

Abstract: Language embeddings are increasingly used in recommenders to represent item content, but their privacy risks remain poorly understood. We study whether item embeddings can reveal item identities when an adversary has access to auxiliary item text from external sources. We show that a simple cosine-similarity attack can recover item identities with high mean reciprocal rank across language models and candidate-set settings on two real-world datasets. Leakage is strongest when the adversary's partial information overlaps with the victim representation, but it also persists through semantic alignment between independently sourced descriptions. We further show that item leakage can propagate to user re-identification from sparse ratings. Finally, we evaluate obfuscated descriptions as a mitigation and find a clear leakage-utility tradeoff.

Thu 15 OctCryptography and SecurityArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Language embeddings are used by recommendation systems to understand items based on their text descriptions. This paper shows that these embeddings can unintentionally reveal the exact identity of items if someone compares them with known text information from other sources. Even when the descriptions are different but related in meaning, the risk remains. Furthermore, this information leak can help identify users based on their item ratings, posing privacy concerns. The authors also find that hiding some details in descriptions reduces leakage but affects recommendation quality.
Open → 2610.21713v1

Memory systems in AI struggle to fully erase user secrets on request

MemCut: Every Secret Leaves a Trail in the Long-Term Memory of LLM Agents

Abstract: Long-term memory has become a crucial component of large language model (LLM) agents, with most research focusing on retrieving relevant information accurately and efficiently. However, a dependable memory system must also forget sensitive user data upon request. To evaluate this capability, we introduce MemCut, a systematic benchmark for user-requested forgetting. Its 456 hand-designed secrets in long-horizon conversations have fully annotated evidence trails to test recovery after deletion, including from messages that never state the secrets directly. We propose two recovery metrics. Native recovery measures reader success through the system's retrieval, whereas residual recovery measures the same reader's success when directly given surviving objects traced to annotated disclosures or evidence. We establish three reference deletion baselines to test how far existing retrievers and write models support forgetting across five memory designs and four LLMs. Disclosure removal reduces native recovery far more than residual recovery. LLM-guided deletion of ten additional turns from twenty retrieval candidates leaves 39-76% residual recovery. Subset sweeps (144 facts, three systems, two models) show that widening the pool at a fixed budget reduces residual recovery more than deleting all original candidates. These sweeps identify candidate coverage as a bottleneck in the reference baselines.

Thu 15 OctArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models can remember information from long conversations, which helps them answer questions better. But sometimes users want the AI to forget sensitive information. The authors created MemCut, a test to see how well AI models erase these secrets when asked. They found that even after deletion, hidden clues in the memory still let the AI partially recover the secrets. This shows that current forgetting methods are not perfect and need improvement.
Open → 2610.21405v1

Llm-based privacy detectors struggle to find joint privacy cues

QuasiLeak-Bench: Evaluating LLM-Based Privacy Detectors on Policy-Conditioned Quasi-Evidence Group Recovery

Abstract: Natural language messages often contain quasi-identifiers that are weak in isolation but can jointly reveal an individual's private attributes. We call such a jointly revealing set of cues a quasi-evidence group. Existing privacy benchmarks focus on explicit identifiers, attribute inference, or task-driven disclosures, leaving inference from quasi-evidence groups largely unmeasured. In practice, whether exposing such a quasi-evidence group violates privacy also depends on sender-specified disclosure policies. We introduce QuasiLeak-Bench, a benchmark for policy-conditioned quasi-evidence group recovery, which evaluates whether detectors recover complete quasi-evidence groups and flag the disclosures the given policy prohibits. To obtain reliable ground truth at scale, a reverse-construction pipeline first selects weak quasi-identifiers, composes them into quasi-evidence groups verified to jointly reveal a target attribute, and generates documents around this evidence, followed by automated quality control. Experiments show that existing privacy detectors transfer poorly to QuasiLeak-Bench, and locally deployable LLM-based detectors fall far behind proprietary models, mainly because they miss most quasi-evidence groups altogether. However, a 4B model fine-tuned on our training split surpasses the strongest prompted model on held-out documents, showing that the task is learnable.

Thu 15 OctComputation and LanguageCryptography and Security
The gist
Messages often contain small clues that alone don’t reveal much, but together can expose private information. The authors call these sets of clues quasi-evidence groups. They created QuasiLeak-Bench, a way to test how well detectors spot these groups and respect privacy rules. Most existing detectors don’t do well on this task, but training a smaller model with their data improves results, showing the problem can be learned.
Open → 2610.21333v1

LLM agents often leak sensitive data despite strong task skills

AgentCIScope: Grounded Contextual Integrity Evaluation for LLM Agents

Abstract: LLM agents are becoming increasingly capable of handling daily workspace tasks by interacting with application environments through tool calls. However, as agents read and write sensitive user data across email, documents, and other applications, a central privacy question is whether they preserve contextual integrity (CI), that is, whether the information flows they produce comply with context-specific disclosure constraints. Existing work either focuses on model-level privacy leakage or evaluates agents in limited application environments with manually constructed disclosure constraints. In this work, we introduce AgentCIScope, a unified platform and benchmark for evaluating agent-level contextual integrity through executable, multi-step tasks across diverse, realistic application environments. AgentCIScope transforms public and synthetic privacy cases into executable agent tasks, with disclosure constraints grounded in three criteria: governing privacy policies, persona-based agreement, and a predefined sensitive-attribute taxonomy. Based on AgentCIScope, we evaluate 12 agents on 936 tasks and find that strong task-completion capability does not guarantee contextual-integrity preservation: single-run leakage rates range from 32.5% to 94.4%, while repeating each task five times further increases leakage by 4-19 percentage points. Leakage varies substantially across attributes: personal preferences and booking details have average leakage rates of 84.7% and 76.5%, compared with 17.1% for credit-card information and 29.4% for SSNs; environments: calendar has the highest average leakage rate as an information source, while WhatsApp ranks highest as an information destination; and governing privacy policies. AgentCIScope provides deep insights into agent privacy leakage and serves as a unified testbed for developing privacy-preserving agents.

Tue 13 OctArtificial IntelligenceCryptography and Security
The gist
Large language model (LLM) agents are helping with tasks by using apps like email and calendars, but they often share sensitive information incorrectly. The paper presents AgentCIScope, a system that tests these agents on tasks with clear privacy rules based on real policies and personal data types. The authors tested 12 agents and found that even agents good at finishing tasks frequently leaked private information, especially on certain data types and apps. This tool helps understand and improve how these AI helpers keep private info safe.
Open → 2610.19158v1

Machine unlearning method keeps model quality with many deletion requests

Counterfactual Certification for Sequential Unlearning with Long-Run Performance Guarantees

Abstract: Certified machine unlearning ensures the proximity between the unlearned model and a model retrained without the data to be forgotten. Extending this framework to sequential deletion requests, typically arriving as groups of variable size (e.g., all records of one user or of coordinated users), is challenging. For unlearning methods based on fine-tuning on the retain sets, this leads to either degrading performance or increasing computation as the number of unlearning requests grows. For independent successive requests, we instead certify each model release against a counterfactual unlearning trajectory in which the group being deleted never took part. With a fixed fine-tuning budget per deletion, we show that, for smooth strongly convex objectives, this approach keeps the performance loss bounded, uniformly in the number of requests. Experiments with multiclass logistic regression on FEMNIST show that the resulting algorithm needs fewer corrective steps than existing sequential methods and outperforms training-time differential privacy, particularly when group sizes are heterogeneous.

Tue 13 OctMachine Learning
The gist
Sometimes, when you want a smart computer program to forget certain data, it can be hard to do this again and again without breaking how well the program works. The authors found a way to help these programs forget groups of data in steps, without the program getting worse over time or needing too much extra work. They tested their way on handwriting recognition and showed it needed fewer fixes and worked better than some privacy methods, especially when the data groups to forget were different sizes.
Open → 2610.17993v1

Information theory bounds how well private models reveal training data

From Pixels to Privacy-Sensitive Features: An Information-Theoretic Framework for Reconstruction Bounds

Abstract: What can an adversary recover from a model trained with DP-SGD? Its $(\varepsilon,δ)$ guarantee does not answer this question directly. We derive a distortion bound that can be computed before training and applies even to an adversary who observes the parameter trajectory during training, knows every other training record and the population distribution from which the training records are drawn. The analyst may choose the representation in which error is measured, allowing the bound to target the aspects of reconstruction that are privacy-sensitive in a given application. Our information-theoretic framework separates two contributions: the information about a record revealed by training, measured through conditional mutual information, and the uncertainty already present in the data distribution, measured through source entropy. Rate-distortion theory combines them into a lower bound on the expected error of every reconstruction attack. For DP-SGD, the leakage bound depends only on the sampling rates and noise multipliers, while the source entropy is lower-bounded from a sample with finite-sample confidence. An orthogonal block construction keeps the resulting bound informative for high-dimensional images. We instantiate the framework in pixel space and in LPIPS feature space, obtaining, to our knowledge, the first lower bound on reconstruction distortion measured directly by LPIPS. On a range of image datasets the bounds establish non-trivial unavoidable expected reconstruction error within heuristically recommended privacy-budget ranges and beyond. Experiments compare the bounds with strong reconstruction attacks and identify the principal sources of the remaining slack.

Fri 9 OctMachine Learning
The gist
When machine learning models are trained to protect privacy, it's not clear exactly what an attacker might still learn about the original data. This paper develops a mathematical way to estimate the minimum error any attacker would have when trying to reconstruct training data from such a model. The method measures how much information about a data record the training reveals, and combines it with how uncertain the data was to start with. The authors show this approach works on image data and gives meaningful limits on reconstruction even when strong attacks try to get private details back.
Open → 2610.13768v1

Large reasoning models unlearn sensitive info without breaking thinking

REDaCT: Collapse-Free Unlearning in Large Reasoning Models

Abstract: Unlearning in large reasoning models (LRMs) requires removing forget-set information from both the reasoning trace and the final answer. Existing approaches achieve this objective at the cost of reasoning collapse, where the model fails to produce a coherent chain-of-thought (CoT) and does not properly terminate its reasoning process. To address this challenge, we propose REDaCT (REgenerate via Detection and Corrective Tuning), an inference-time unlearning framework for LRMs. REDaCT consists of two key components: (1) a binary leak detector that identifies sentences in the reasoning trace that leak forget-set information, and (2) an embedding optimization module that learns a corrective embedding offline, such that when injected at the first detected leak during inference, it guides subsequent reasoning towards sentences that do not leak forget-set information. Experimental results show that REDaCT completely avoids reasoning collapse, substantially improving reasoning preservation compared to state-of-the-art unlearning methods while maintaining perfect answer forgetting and near-perfect CoT forgetting. Our code is available at: https://github.com/jmaccoby/redact.

Thu 8 OctMachine LearningArtificial IntelligenceComputation and Language
The gist
Sometimes AI models have to forget certain facts, but this can make them stop reasoning clearly. The authors propose a new technique called REDaCT that spots where the AI might reveal forgotten info and fixes its thinking to avoid mistakes. This way, the AI forgets what it should but still makes sense and finishes its reasoning properly. Their tests show REDaCT does this better than earlier methods.
Open → 2610.12769v1

Forget only unlearning may require memorizing more data than training

Why Forget-Only Unlearning Needs Memorization

Abstract: Machine unlearning asks for a deletion algorithm whose output is close to retraining from scratch without the selected forget examples. In this work, we study forget-only unlearning, where the deletion algorithm receives only the trained model and the examples to forget, with no retained data or extra training information. We ask whether forget-only unlearning is always possible. We first show that this depends on the learning method: different datasets can produce the same trained model but require very different outputs after the same examples are removed. Using this observation, we derive lower bounds on how accurately unlearning can match retraining and instantiate them for several standard learning algorithms. We then ask what must be true when forget-only unlearning succeeds. To this end, we derive lower bounds on what an algorithm must memorize about the training data to handle arbitrary deletion requests. For simple threshold learners, the required information can be as large as the entire dataset, even though ordinary training keeps only one boundary point. Overall, our results show that information discarded during ordinary learning may be needed later for deletion, so models designed for forget-only unlearning may need to retain more information than standard training does.

Wed 7 OctMachine LearningInformation Theory
The gist
Sometimes we want to remove specific examples from a trained machine learning model without retraining it from scratch. This paper shows that if a deletion method only has access to the trained model and the examples to forget—without extra data—it might not always work perfectly. The authors found that in some cases, to remove data correctly later on, the model must remember more information about the original training data than typical training keeps. So, designing models that can forget specific data easily might mean storing more information upfront.
Open → 2610.10519v1

Whiteout prevents large language models from revealing private data

Mitigating Private Data Leakage in LLMs with Whiteout

Abstract: Modern large language models (LLMs) are trained on massive, largely unfiltered datasets, including content scraped from nearly every accessible website and user inputs. As a result, LLMs often memorize and reproduce personally sensitive information (PSI) such as birth dates, phone numbers, and home addresses. This leads to significant privacy risks, particularly for high-profile individuals such as executives, politicians, and judges. Existing mitigations largely rely on machine unlearning. However, these methods often remove more information than needed, degrade model utility and safety, and are highly vulnerable to attacks. This paper presents Whiteout, a practical tool that, upon requests by individuals, prevents LLMs from regurgitating their genuine PSIs, by overwriting them using precise and carefully designed obfuscation samples. We evaluate Whiteout on modern LLMs of varying sizes and makers, including a widely-used OpenAI model. Results show that Whiteout effectively prevents disclosure of the targeted PSIs, has negligible impact on model utility and safety, and outperforms existing alternatives. We also test Whiteout against a wide range of countermeasures, from black-box attacks like jailbreaking to white-box adaptive attacks like relearning and quantization. Finally, we conclude with a discussion on the security and ethical implications of Whiteout.

Thu 1 OctCryptography and SecurityArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models are trained on many websites and user inputs, so they sometimes memorize and repeat sensitive personal information. This creates privacy problems, especially for important people. The authors introduce Whiteout, a tool that stops these models from sharing real private data by overwriting it with carefully designed fake data. Their tests show Whiteout works well without hurting the model’s usefulness or safety, and beats other methods.
Open → 2610.02418v1

Machine unlearning improved by subtracting forget signals efficiently

Unmerge: Efficient Machine Unlearning via Task Arithmetic

Abstract: Approximate machine unlearning seeks to remove the influence of a forget set from a trained model without full retraining. Existing gradient-based methods require data-dependent hyperparameter search, struggle when forget and retain knowledge are entangled, and offer little insight into where unlearning actually happens inside the network. We recast unlearning through the lens of task arithmetic: if finetuning produces a merged task vector $τ_m$ that combines learning on forget and retain sets, unlearning is the inverse operation that subtracts a learned forget component $τ_F$ to recover the retain task vector $τ_R$. The forget signal is concentrated: at every layer, forget activations lie in a subspace spanned by a handful of dominant directions, so we factorize $τ_F$ in a low-rank forget basis, which is faithful up to a small tail-eigenvalue residual and limits how far the correction can perturb retain. We then optimize three intuitive goals (match the merged vector inside the forget span, suppress leakage into the retain span, and bound the correction size) that provably bound forget leakage and retain damage in activation space. The resulting algorithm, Unmerge, is fast and powerful: on class-level unlearning with ResNet-50 on CIFAR-100 and Tiny ImageNet, it improves Tug-of-War by up to ~24% over a baseline of comparable runtime and by up to ~18% over stronger baselines that run ~5x slower, keeps membership-inference exposure at the level of retraining, and shrinks the feature-distribution gap to the retrained model, where relabeling methods leave forget features cleanly separable. Further studies show that Unmerge also applies to ViT-S/16 and scales to Llama-3.2-3B. The per-layer basis geometry that drives the algorithm also serves as a layerwise diagnostic for when and where unlearning becomes structurally hard.

Wed 30 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Sometimes we want a trained AI model to "forget" certain data without retraining it from scratch, which is slow and costly. This paper introduces a new method called Unmerge that views unlearning as subtracting a learned 'forget' part from the combined knowledge the model has. By focusing on important directions where the forget data influences the model, Unmerge can remove that influence quickly and accurately while keeping useful knowledge intact. This approach works well on popular image and language models and gives insights into where models struggle to unlearn.
Open → 2609.38895v1

Causal routing enables targeted forgetting in large language models

Causal Routing for Unlearning

Abstract: LLMs cannot forget the way we delete a file. Strangely, we are asked to remove something that was never put anywhere in particular. What the model took from a piece of text is now smeared across billions of weights. Existing methods rewrite all of them to change one thing, and none of them say which part produced that change. To address this, we introduce Causal Routing for Unlearning (CRU) by asking where the concept is expressed in the model and suppressing only that part. One untrained forward pass over the forget set ranks neurons by how their activations vary. Then, small routing modules on those neurons gate and suppress only the concepts that need to be forgotten. In CRU, the base model is frozen, and any change in behavior is caused only by the gated neurons; hence, why the routing is causal. Due to our parameter efficiency (only ~0.01% as many parameters as the base model), unlearning a concept costs 14 GiB, whereas the baselines require 71 GiB. On TOFU, CRU is indistinguishable from the retained model (p > 0.05, KS test) and is never Pareto-dominated, whereas every compared baseline matches its forgetting on the larger-forget batches only by collapsing utility. On RWKU, it achieves an adversarial-probe recall of 0.052, compared to 0.250 for the strongest baseline, meaning the knowledge is gone, not merely harder to reach. Thus, deciding on the intervention at query time, rather than fixing it beforehand, is the axis along which we argue that unlearning should proceed.

Mon 28 SeptMachine LearningArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large language models (LLMs) spread knowledge across millions of parameters, making it hard to remove specific information once learned. The paper introduces Causal Routing for Unlearning (CRU), a way to identify which neurons represent a concept and selectively suppress just those neurons. This targeted suppression allows the model to forget certain content without retraining the entire network or harming other knowledge. CRU uses less memory and better preserves the model’s abilities compared to previous methods.
Open → 2609.34475v1

Continual unlearning improves data removal in diffusion models

Continual Data Unlearning in Diffusion Models via Transition-based Regularization

Abstract: Data unlearning in diffusion models aims to remove the influence of specific training examples without suppressing the broader concepts they represent. However, when deletion requests arrive sequentially, updates for new requests can degrade generative utility and undermine earlier deletions. We propose a continual data unlearning framework that uses completed deletion transitions as directional references to regularize future updates. For each request, we record changes in denoiser responses on the same fixed noisy inputs before and after unlearning. Rather than matching full post-deletion responses, we apply a one-sided penalty that discourages reversal along the recorded directions relative to the post-deletion references, while leaving orthogonal response changes and progress beyond these references unpenalized. To keep storage independent of the number of requests, we maintain a fixed-capacity bank of representative transition records. Records are selected based on the local sensitivity of progress along their recorded directions to parameter updates, allowing them to be retained even when their penalties are inactive. Empirical evaluations show that the proposed framework achieves a better balance between deletion persistence and generative utility than existing unlearning baselines as requests accumulate, using only a small transition memory.

Sat 26 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
Sometimes, AI models need to forget specific training examples without losing what they’ve learned overall. This paper shows how to help diffusion models forget requested data one step at a time without breaking earlier forget requests or making the model worse at creating images. The authors save small snapshots of changes made during each forget action and use these to guide future forgets, preventing them from undoing past work. Their method keeps memory needs low and balances both forgetting and preserving quality better than existing approaches.
Open → 2609.32328v1

Vietnamese system automates privacy record extraction with local AI models

Automated Extraction of Records of Processing Activities (RoPA) Using Hybrid RAG and Locally Deployed Large Language Models

Abstract: Vietnam's Personal Data Protection Law (Law No. 91/2025/QH15) and Decree No. 356/2025/ND-CP, effective January 1, 2026, require organizations to establish and maintain Records of Processing Activities (RoPA). Manual RoPA preparation is labor-intensive, while cloud-hosted large language models (LLMs) may conflict with data-sovereignty requirements. We propose RoPA Manager, a system for automated RoPA information extraction using hybrid retrieval that combines lexical ranking over tsvector, dense-vector search, Reciprocal Rank Fusion (RRF), and locally deployed LLMs. We introduce a Vietnamese RoPA benchmark with 32 organizations, 77 processing activities, 12 field groups, and 4,338 reference values. Evaluation is reported at three distinct levels. The automated scorer, tested on perturbed data without invoking an LLM, achieved F1 = 0.9493 [0.9436, 0.9548]; this measures scorer robustness rather than end-to-end extraction accuracy. End-to-end extraction achieved token coverage of 50.04-55.25% against the reference labels. Two independent experts reviewed 1,558 reference values (35.9% of the benchmark), found no incorrect values, and achieved 99.68% agreement with PABAK = 0.9936. Value-level precision was not measured. Across 32 paired scenarios on a 24 GB GPU, locally deployed Qwen3.5-27B-GPTQ-Int4 showed no statistically significant difference from cloud-based DeepSeek-V4-Flash (difference 0.20 percentage points in favor of DeepSeek, 95% CI [-0.93, 1.32], p = 0.72), while Gemma-4-31B performed significantly worse (p < 0.01).

Wed 23 SeptComputation and LanguageCryptography and SecurityInformation Retrieval
The gist
Many organizations in Vietnam must document how they handle personal data, but doing this by hand is slow and difficult. The authors created a system called RoPA Manager that automatically pulls out important information from documents using a mix of search techniques and AI language models that run on local computers. This approach respects privacy rules that restrict sending data to online services. They tested their system on real Vietnamese data and found it works well without errors, and the locally run AI models performed about as well as cloud-based ones.
Open → 2609.27359v1

System analyzes corporate privacy policies using large language models

Decoding the Legalese: A Scalable and Quantitative Framework for Analyzing Corporate Privacy Policies

Abstract: Even though privacy policies are the primary mechanism organizations use to disclose how they collect, process, and share personal data, they are difficult for average users to interpret, perhaps by design, due to their verbosity and dense legal language. Importantly, there is a lack of standardized metrics that characterize key qualities of a privacy policy beyond regulatory requirements. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) make it feasible to automatically structure and analyze these documents at scale. In this study, we develop and evaluate an end-to-end, LLM-enabled system that converts raw privacy policies into fine-grained structured representations and a set of quantitative measures. Our pipeline applies a detailed taxonomy to extract specific data elements and governing practices, capturing relational links that connect each practice to the data elements it references. We apply our framework to a diverse corpus of 10,000 website privacy policies, yielding, to the best of our knowledge, the most comprehensive dataset of its kind to date. Building on our structured representations, we introduce the first standardized and repeatable quantitative metrics for evaluating privacy policies along four dimensions: completeness, transparency, commitment to user protection, and emphasis on business-driven data practices. This allows us to compare policies within and across industry sectors, and to assess the tension between user protection and business interests.

Tue 22 SeptCryptography and SecurityComputers and Society
The gist
Privacy policies are often long and full of legal words, making them hard for most people to understand. The authors created a system that uses advanced AI language models to turn these policies into easy-to-read data, highlighting important parts like what information is collected and how it is used. They studied 10,000 policies, making one of the biggest collections ever, and developed clear ways to measure how complete, transparent, and user-focused these policies are. This helps compare companies and industries on how well they protect user privacy versus pursue business goals.
Open → 2609.26680v1

Offline reinforcement learning faces hidden backdoor risks after data removal

UBA-ORL: Unlearning-Activated Backdoor Attacks on Offline Reinforcement Learning

Abstract: Offline reinforcement learning (offline RL) enables policy learning from pre-collected static datasets without online exploration, and is increasingly deployed not only in safety-critical domains such as autonomous driving and robotic control but also in data-mining applications such as recommendation and behavior analysis. While compliance-driven data removal enhances privacy, it also opens a previously unrecognized attack surface. We introduce UBA-ORL (Unlearning-activated Backdoor Attack on Offline Reinforcement Learning), the first unlearning-activated backdoor attack for offline RL: in the evaluated settings, the attack is substantially suppressed after normal training and becomes pronounced after a compliance-driven deletion (unlearning) request. UBA-ORL employs a dual-sample mechanism: alongside backdoor trajectories (BD) that link a trigger to malicious actions under inflated rewards, the attacker injects camouflage trajectories (CM) sharing the same trigger pattern but preserving benign actions with equally high rewards. During training, BD and CM provide competing supervisory signals; upon a legitimate deletion request on the CM subset, the residual BD signal can re-dominate, reactivating the backdoor on demand. Empirical results show that UBA-ORL achieves controllable activation under the evaluated offline-RL configurations, while no-trigger return changes vary by configuration, exposing a previously overlooked security risk in compliance-driven offline RL platforms. We urge the community to develop joint pre-/post-unlearning auditing mechanisms for compliant unlearning services.

Sat 19 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
Offline reinforcement learning (RL) trains computer systems to make decisions using only existing data, without trying things out in real life. The authors found a sneaky way to hide harmful triggers in the training data that don’t show up during normal use but come back after specific parts of the data are deleted to follow privacy rules. Their method uses two types of data with the same trigger but different behaviors, so removing one type accidentally activates the harmful behavior. This reveals a new security risk in how offline RL systems handle data removal, especially as these systems are used for important tasks like driving or recommendations. The authors suggest creating new ways to check data before and after removal to keep these systems safe.
Open → 2609.22711v1

Large reasoning models learn to forget sensitive details naturally

GUARD: Natural Forgetting in Large Reasoning Models via Guided Answer-Reasoning Distillation

Abstract: Recent advances in large reasoning models (LRMs) have made machine unlearning more challenging, as protected facts or unsafe rationales may surface in intermediate chain-of-thought (CoT) traces before the final answer is produced. Existing unlearning objectives typically suppress the target content or redirect internal representations, but they never specify how the post-forgetting trajectory should continue, which can lead to hallucinated substitutes, malformed boundaries, or repetitive outputs. We argue that LRM unlearning should instead learn a natural forgetting trajectory: a coherent non-disclosing CoT followed by a stable refusal-style answer that replace the original disclosure. To this end, we propose Guided Answer-Reasoning Distillation (GUARD), which converts model-generated unsafe disclosures into safe-exit trajectories, aligns a frozen LRM via guidance tokens, and distills the guided behavior into model parameters.To address the lack of metrics for replacement quality beyond leakage, we further introduce Natural Forgetting Reasoning Score (NFRS), which captures structural stability, fluency, and unsupported substitutes in forgotten outputs. Extensive experiments on R-TOFU and a STAR-1-derived harmful-intent setting show that GUARD substantially reduces unsafe and privacy disclosures across two widely adopted distilled LRMs while preserving reasoning utility. Codes are available at https://github.com/zeyu-Yan/GUARD

Fri 18 SeptArtificial Intelligence
The gist
Large AI models that think through answers step-by-step can accidentally reveal private or unsafe information during their reasoning process. The authors propose a method called GUARD that teaches these models to forget such sensitive details in a natural way, by guiding the reasoning to safely avoid disclosing protected facts and instead provide a clear refusal when needed. They also created a way to measure how well the model’s new responses behave after forgetting sensitive content. Their tests show GUARD effectively reduces unsafe disclosures while keeping the model’s reasoning ability intact.
Open → 2609.21677v1

Multilingual benchmark measures machine unlearning across languages

$μ^2$-Bench: A Multilingual Machine Unlearning Benchmark

Abstract: Undesired information such as harmful content and private data propagates through Multilingual Large Language Models (LLMs) via direct training and indirect cross-linguistic spread. Multilingual Machine Unlearning (MMU) aims to remove such information, yet its evaluation remains underexplored, leaving unclear whether unlearning truly eliminates target knowledge across all languages. To bridge this gap, we introduce $μ^2$-Bench, an MMU benchmark that simulates the full pipeline of memorization, unlearning, and evaluation across diverse languages. It 1) spans a broad set of languages, 2) evaluates on both training and hold-out languages, and 3) assesses knowledge as dispersed across multiple languages. We show that successful MMU requires methods that reflect multilingual characteristics, and conduct analysis to provide deeper insights into MMU.

Thu 17 SeptComputation and Language
The gist
Some language models can remember and share unwanted or harmful information in many languages, even if trained on just a few. The authors created a new test called μ²-Bench to see if a model really forgets bad information in all languages after being told to unlearn it. This test checks many languages and tracks how the knowledge spreads and disappears. Their results suggest that effective forgetting needs special methods considering how languages connect. This can help make language models safer and respect privacy better worldwide.
Open → 2609.20945v1

CiteGuard-RAG improves answer trustworthiness by validating citations in AI systems

CiteGuard-RAG: A Validation-Centered AI System for Evidence-Grounded Question Answering

Abstract: Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) can improve access to complex information; however, retrieving evidence alone does not ensure that answers are grounded, citation-valid, or appropriately refused. This paper introduces CiteGuard-RAG, a validation-centered AI system for evidence-grounded question answering. The system integrates hybrid semantic-lexical retrieval, citation-constrained generation, sentence-level grounding validation, and single-pass regeneration. Validation is used at runtime to determine whether a candidate answer should be accepted, refused, or regenerated before final delivery. CiteGuard-RAG is evaluated on 400 questions across a controlled housing-law dataset, PrivacyQA, and CUAD. In the controlled evaluation, it achieves 99.1% retrieval accuracy, 98.3% grounded-answer accuracy, and 98.3% citation validity, with no validation-detected hallucinations. Ablation results show that grounded-answer accuracy drops sharply when validation is removed, even when retrieval accuracy remains unchanged. External evaluation shows that while citation validity remains strong, evidence utilization, span alignment, and refusal calibration become harder under domain shift. These findings indicate that trustworthy RAG systems require explicit validation between retrieval and final answer delivery. CiteGuard-RAG provides a practical architecture for linking retrieval, generation, citation checking, abstention, and regeneration in high-stakes information access.

Mon 14 SeptComputation and LanguageArtificial IntelligenceInformation Retrieval
The gist
Sometimes AI systems that find and answer questions from lots of information make up answers or use wrong sources. The researchers created CiteGuard-RAG, a system that checks the evidence and sources while it answers questions, making sure the answers are accurate and properly cited. They tested it on legal and privacy topics, showing it can almost always find the right information and confirm it before answering. Without these checks, the answers become less accurate, proving that validation is important for trust.
Open → 2609.15830v1

Age assurance requires sociotechnical process not just technical checks

Reconceptualizing Age Assurance as a Sociotechnical Problem: Connecting Evidence, Evaluation, Claims, and Decisions

Abstract: Age verification is often treated as a technical problem: can a system determine a child's age accurately? We argue this framing is too narrow. Age assurance becomes consequential when evidence is evaluated, translated into age-related claims, and used to decide whether a person can access, purchase, or belong. We review 85 publications on children's age assurance published from 2020 through February 2026. We find that shared terms such as age verification describe different processes. Age is represented as threshold eligibility or inferred estimation, and the same eligibility claim can arise from different evidence and components. Rights, access, and privacy receive more attention than accuracy, error, and fairness; yet institutional actors are rarely connected to system failures or user remedies, an accountability gap. We introduce the Age-Assurance Process Framework, which treats age assurance as a sociotechnical process connecting evidence, evaluation, claims, and decisions rather than reducing it to a technical problem.

Fri 11 SeptHuman-Computer InteractionComputers and Society
The gist
Age verification is usually seen as a technical problem of checking if someone is a child or not. The authors show that this is too narrow because age assurance involves how evidence is judged, how age claims are made, and how decisions are taken about access or rights. They reviewed many studies and found that different systems use different methods and ideas of age, with bigger focus on rights and privacy than on accuracy or fairness. They present a new framework that treats age assurance as a combined social and technical process connecting evidence, claims, evaluations, and decisions.
Open → 2609.13598v1

Large language models assist automated privacy impact assessments

PIA-Bench: Towards Automated Privacy Impact Assessment with Large Language Models

Abstract: Privacy impact assessment (PIA) is a critical instrument for institutions to proactively identify privacy risks and develop mitigation strategies before system deployment. While mandated across regulatory and institutional contexts, executing PIA requires extensive privacy and technical expertise, posing a particular challenge for teams without access to such resources. Prior work shows the potential of leveraging large language models (LLMs) to assist practitioners' privacy decisions, but little is known about how accurately and reliably LLMs can automate PIA. To this end, we develop PIA-Bench, the first open benchmark for evaluating LLMs on real-world PIAs. We first audited 499 expert-authored PIAs published by US federal agencies and curated 73 structured PIAs, comprising a total of 451 privacy risk and 831 mitigation items, to evaluate LLMs' ability to assess privacy risks and propose mitigations of complex systems. Our results show that off-the-shelf LLMs produce meaningful assessments and identify avenues for future improvement. Finally, we call for improving domain-specific workflows for LLM agents, developing accountable LLM infrastructure, and designing new quality standards for PIAs.

Fri 11 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
Privacy impact assessments help organizations find and fix privacy problems before launching new systems, but they usually need experts. The authors created a benchmark called PIA-Bench to test how well large language models (LLMs) can do this job by looking at real-world government assessments. They found that current LLMs can produce useful privacy risk identifications and suggest ways to reduce those risks, although there is room for improvement. Their work suggests ways to improve how AI tools are used for privacy checks and calls for better standards and accountability.
Open → 2609.12571v1

Metaverse user worlds risk privacy through hidden surveillance hacks

Omniscience for the Masses: New Threats in the Metaverse's Democratized World Creation

Abstract: Metaverse platforms increasingly derive their success from user-generated virtual worlds: self-contained social and interactive environments, which can be created by any ordinary user and scale to billions of visits. Platforms such as Roblox, Horizon Worlds, and VRChat now host millions of creator-built worlds that govern how users see, hear, and interact with one another. While this model enables rapid growth and creativity, it fundamentally delegates control over social interactions and world behavior to untrusted users. In this paper, we present the first systematic security and privacy assessment of metaverse world creators. We survey 25 platforms that support user-created worlds and analyze their world-creation capabilities. Guided by this analysis, we design and implement five novel attacks that exploit creator-provided tools to violate spatial, visual, and auditory constraints in immersive environments, enabling covert user surveillance and manipulation without software vulnerabilities or developer-level privileges. We further show that five previously-proposed attacks can be replicated using only standard world-creation features. Finally, we find that existing platform vetting, runtime protections, and creator policies are insufficient to mitigate malicious world-creator behavior, revealing a fundamental mismatch between users' privacy expectations and the powers granted to world creators.

Fri 11 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
Metaverse platforms let everyday users create their own virtual worlds that others can visit and explore. The authors found that these user-created worlds can secretly spy on visitors or manipulate what they see and hear, all without needing special hacks or permissions. They showed several ways these privacy-invading tricks can be done using the standard tools available to creators. Existing platform rules and protections do not stop these hidden attacks, which means people’s privacy is at risk when using these virtual worlds.
Open → 2609.12554v1

Plain language makes cookie banners easier to understand for everyone

Senseful Consense: Towards Simplified Cookie Banners using Plain Language

Abstract: While the GDPR and ePrivacy Directive mandate that consent information must be clear and accessible, most modern cookie banners remain obscured by technical jargon, vague phrasing, and frequent content overload or underload. This feasibility study investigates the impact of applying plain language (Einfache Sprache) to cookie banners within the IAB Transparency & Consent Framework (TCF). In our study, we analysed cookie banner texts from 200 websites, using AI-based mapping to categorise extracted content into standardised processing purposes. By substituting complex legal terms with simplified descriptions, we successfully demonstrated that the comprehension barrier can be lowered from a college-graduate level to a 7th-grade level. However, the effectiveness of plain language is inherently constrained by the informativeness of the original content; it cannot compensate for banners that omit legally required details. We conclude that while plain language is a vital tool for digital accessibility, it must be paired with standardised implementation guidelines to ensure that cookie banners are both readable and informative.

Wed 9 SeptComputers and SocietyHuman-Computer Interaction
The gist
Many cookie banners that ask for consent use complicated legal language that is hard for most people to understand. The authors studied 200 websites and changed their cookie banners into simpler language that matches a 7th-grade reading level instead of college-level. This makes the banners easier to read, but it can’t fix banners that leave out important information. The authors say that simple language should be combined with clear rules so banners are both easy to read and contain the right information.
Open → 2609.10271v1

Privacy auditing framework reveals mixed compliance with California law

PrivAudit: A Dual-Lens Auditing Framework for Website Privacy Practices under the CCPA

Abstract: Five years after the enforcement of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), understanding how website privacy practices evolve at scale in response to regulation remains a key challenge for both researchers and regulators. Prior work and regulatory efforts have focused on manual and case-specific enforcement, but there remain no scalable approaches to systematically audit two key user-facing facets of websites that are crucial signals for the CCPA: privacy disclosures and front-end user tracking behavior. In this paper, we present PrivAudit, an automated auditing framework that adopts a dual-lens approach to capture: (1) privacy disclosures through large language model-based analysis of privacy policies grounded in CCPA provisions, and (2) user-observable data collection behavior through automated browser measurements of cookie writes under diverse privacy configurations. We apply PrivAudit to 998 websites and report two broad findings. The law is associated with stronger privacy disclosures: CCPA-subject policies are more likely to disclose opt-out mechanisms, data-sharing practices, and user rights. On the other hand, cookie-based tracking remains pervasive, with both CCPA-subject and not-subject websites setting a total of 6,392 targeting cookies, 49% of which are third-party writes. Moreover, cookies show limited-to-moderate responsiveness to privacy signals and consent choices, even when websites claim to honor them in their disclosures. Our results highlight the need for multi-layered and scalable auditing approaches that combine policy analysis with behavioral evidence. PrivAudit can support these auditing workflows at scale by generating actionable signals and patterns for further manual review. We open-source PrivAudit and are engaging with regulators to support auditing in practice.

Wed 9 SeptCryptography and Security
The gist
It can be hard to check if websites really follow privacy laws like the CCPA, which protects users in California. The authors built a tool called PrivAudit that looks at both what websites say in their privacy policies and what cookies they place on users’ browsers. They found that while many websites explain user rights better, tracking cookies are still very common and users’ choices are often not fully respected. This shows the need for tools that look at policies and actual behavior to spot privacy problems.
Open → 2609.09697v1

BatchNorm hidden actions can mislead machine unlearning tests

The BatchNorm Illusion: Diagnosing Normalization Artifacts in Machine Unlearning Evaluation

Abstract: Approximate machine unlearning aims to remove the influence of specific training data from a trained model without retraining from scratch. We identify a previously undocumented confound in how unlearning is evaluated on BatchNorm-based architectures: a single forward pass over retain data, an operation that modifies no weight, can deterministically rewrite the model's normalization state and reverse the apparent surface-metric forgetting. We formalize this operation as a weight-preserving fixed-point operator and prove that any pre-versus-post gap it induces is provably attributable to BN running statistics rather than to any modification the unlearning method made to the weights. This attribution claim cleanly separates measurement failure (BN artifact) from encoder failure (residual weight-encoded information, recently documented in concurrent work), and the same operator framework yields a unique decomposition of linear-probe elevation into BN-measurement-bias and encoder-geometry components. Empirically, the artifact reverses headline forget accuracy by up to 78 pp across nine evaluated methods on standard benchmarks; an attacker with as few as 10 unlabeled images recovers most of the masked accuracy; and a strict GroupNorm control reduces the artifact to zero across all methods. The tested membership-inference attacks change little under recalibration, locating the observed evaluation failure in forget accuracy and linear probing.

Tue 8 SeptMachine Learning
The gist
When a computer model is taught to forget certain training data, the usual tests to check if it actually forgot can be tricked. This happens because Batch Normalization layers inside the model update their internal settings even when the model’s main parts don’t change. The authors explain this hidden change creates a false impression that the model remembers more than it should, which earlier tests missed. They also show how this error can be fixed by using another method called Group Normalization. This helps make sure tests properly measure if the model truly forgets the data.
Open → 2609.08901v1

Concept risk auditing helps govern image generation models safely

Concept-Level Risk and Calibration for Governance in Diffusion Foundation Models

Abstract: Diffusion models have become a core paradigm for multimedia generation, offering powerful concept-driven controllability for personalization, semantic editing, and selective unlearning. However, as semantic control extends beyond natural-language prompts to learned embeddings and intervention pipelines, the safety and governance of these systems become increasingly difficult to evaluate in a unified manner, especially for safety-sensitive, identity-linked, and other privacy-relevant concepts. Existing studies mainly rely on heuristic audits, adversarial probing, or task-specific erasure benchmarks, and therefore provide limited support for systematic comparison across models, conditioning channels, and deployment conditions. We present a concept-level probabilistic audit and reporting framework for diffusion models. We formalize governance-relevant concept behaviors as Bernoulli semantic events induced by stochastic generation, and define a Concept Risk Operator that maps model-channel configurations to structured risk profiles, enabling comparison across prompting interfaces, learned embedding channels, models, and recorded conditions. We apply sample-level post-hoc calibration and configuration-level risk aggregation, and show that probability error can change thresholded actions near policy boundaries. Experiments on SD1.5, SD2.1, and SDXL reveal consistent yet non-uniform operational risk patterns across concept families, channels, recorded conditions, and shifted protocols. In particular, embedding-based access and obfuscated prompts expose risks often understated by standard-prompt evaluation. A pooled multi-protocol calibrator improves held-out probability reliability, but we do not claim transfer from a standard-only calibrator. CLRC provides a common audit schema for probabilistic and decision-aware governance of multimedia generation systems.

Tue 8 SeptMultimedia
The gist
Diffusion models create images and videos based on concepts people provide, but it’s hard to check if they behave safely or respect privacy for sensitive ideas. The authors propose a way to measure and report the chances that these models might misuse or mishandle important concepts, like identities, across different ways of interacting with the model. Their method helps compare risks between models and input styles, making it easier to manage and govern these systems. They also show that using some types of inputs, like learned embeddings, can reveal risks that are hidden when only testing standard text prompts.
Open → 2609.08517v1

Privacy tools fail to stop harms from real-world data misuse

Enhancing Privacy, Neglecting Harms: An Analysis of Real-World Digital Privacy Incidents

Abstract: Privacy-enhancing technologies (PETs) have emerged as a technical means for providing individuals with greater control over their information. Yet despite the growing deployment of PETs, people continue to experience privacy harms. In this work, we revisit our understanding of privacy incidents and the realities of those experiencing privacy harms, to assess whether the goals and abilities of PETs are misaligned with the harms people face. For our study, we collect news articles that correspond to a sample of 257 real-world privacy incidents. We employ content analysis over the articles to develop a new information flow model that encompasses the complexity of data flows and their relation to resulting harms. We demonstrate that our model captures both established and novel aspects of privacy incidents and their mitigations. In particular, it captures why consent is often insufficient to prevent privacy violations, how harms emerge from complex interactions among multiple entities and actions, and reveals a flaw in our understanding of PETs: a focus on enabling functionalities still permits the harms inherent in those functionalities. Moreover, we find that the entities best positioned to implement harm-preventing measures for the incidents in our sample are the least incentivized to do so. Overall, our model and analysis identify limitations of privacy technology research for harm prevention and further identifies paths for transforming how we approach the advancement of these technologies.

Mon 7 SeptCryptography and SecurityComputers and Society
The gist
Digital privacy tools are designed to give people more control over their personal information, but privacy harms still happen. The researchers studied 257 real privacy incidents reported in the news to understand why privacy protections often fall short. They built a new model showing that privacy harms come from complex interactions between many parties and that simply getting consent doesn’t stop violations. They also found that those who could best prevent harm often lack the motivation to do so, which limits how well current privacy technologies can protect people.
Open → 2609.07217v1