Summary

A research conducted by Google DeepMind and numerous universities looks at how easily an outsider, without any prior knowledge of the data used to train a machine learning model, can get this information just by asking the model questions. We found that an adversary can pull out a lot of data, even gigabytes, from publicly available language models like Pythia or GPT-Neo, semi-public ones like LLaMA or Falcon, and private models like ChatGPT.

Key Findings:

- Vulnerabilities in Language Models: The research identifies vulnerabilities across various types of Language Models, ranging from open source (Pythia) to closed models (ChatGPT), and semi-open models (LLaMa). The vulnerabilities in semi-open and closed models are particularly concerning due to the non-public nature of their training data.

- Focus on Extractable Memorization: The study delves into the risks of extractable memorization, where data can be efficiently extracted from a machine learning model without prior knowledge of the training dataset.

- Enhanced Data Extraction Capabilities: The attack model developed by the researchers enables the extraction of training data at rates exceeding 150% compared to normal Language Model usage.

- Ineffectiveness of Data Deduplication: The research indicates that deduplication of training data does not significantly reduce the amount of data that can be extracted.

- Uncertainties in Data Handling: The study highlights ongoing uncertainties in how training data is processed and retained by Language Models.

Seamus Larroque

CDPO / CPIM / ISO 27005 Certified

Home

Discover our latest articles

View All Blog Posts
June 11, 2026
Events
Data Governance
Data Privacy Enforcement
Health Data Warehouse

Vendor GDPR in Clinical Trials: What the IQVIA CNIL Ruling Changes for Sponsors and Healthtech Companies

On 26 May 2026 the CNIL fined IQVIA Operations France EUR 5 million for failures in its two authorised health data warehouses, LRX and EMR. The decision exposes weaknesses in CRO data protection practice that have direct consequences for every pharmaceutical sponsor relying on a CRO to process patient, prescription or trial data. This article unpacks the four areas of failure, explains why pseudonymisation no longer offers the cover many sponsors assume, and sets out a practical oversight checklist for sponsor data controllers.

February 9, 2026
AI
Biotech & Healthtech
Regulations & Guidelines
Healthcare

EU AI Act for Healthcare: What Life Sciences Companies Need to Know before August 2026

EU AI Act 2026 healthcare enforcement requires immediate compliance to avoid penalties.

February 2, 2026
Healthtech
US Privacy Law
USA

Navigating US Regulatory Requirements for AI-Powered Medical Devices: A Comprehensive Guide to FDA, HIPAA, and IRB Compliance

US AI medical device compliance requires navigating FDA, HIPAA, IRBs, and consent waivers strategically.

FAQs

Our frequently questions

No items found.