Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
121 lines (96 loc) · 7.75 KB

mitigations.md

File metadata and controls

121 lines (96 loc) · 7.75 KB

Mitigation Strategies Analysis for coqui-ai/tts

Mitigation Strategy: 1. Input Validation and Sanitization (for TTS Input)

Description: 1. Define Allowed Characters: Create a whitelist of allowed characters for the text passed to the TTS engine. 2. Character Encoding: Enforce consistent character encoding (UTF-8) for all TTS inputs. 3. Length Limits: Set a maximum character limit for text sent to the TTS engine. 4. Denylist Implementation: Create a list of forbidden words, phrases, and patterns (regex) specifically for TTS input. This should include names, sensitive terms, and potentially harmful content. 5. Whitelist Implementation (Optional): If feasible, define pre-approved phrases or templates for TTS synthesis. 6. Input Validation Function: Create a function that performs all checks before calling the TTS synthesis function. 7. Integration: Integrate this validation function directly before the TTS API call. 8. Regular Review: Regularly review and update the denylist/whitelist.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious Audio Generation (Deepfakes): (Severity: High) Directly limits the content that can be synthesized.
    • Data Leakage (Inference-time Attacks): (Severity: Medium) Makes crafting exploitable inputs harder.
    • Model Poisoning/Backdooring (Indirectly): (Severity: Medium) Limits the impact of a poisoned model.
    • Denial of Service (DoS) via Resource Exhaustion (Partially): (Severity: Medium) Length limits help.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious Audio Generation: Significantly reduces risk.
    • Data Leakage: Moderately reduces risk.
    • Model Poisoning: Slightly reduces the impact.
    • DoS: Partially reduces risk.

  • Currently Implemented: (Example: "Input validation function in tts_service.py. Length limit enforced. No denylist.")

  • Missing Implementation: (Example: "Denylist needs implementation. Whitelist not feasible. Validation needs to be more thoroughly tested with edge cases.")

Mitigation Strategy: 2. Watermarking (of TTS Output)

Description: 1. Inaudible Watermarking Research: Research and select an inaudible watermarking technique suitable for TTS-generated audio. 2. Watermark Generation: Develop a function to generate a unique watermark for each TTS output. 3. Watermark Embedding: Integrate watermark embedding into the TTS pipeline, after audio generation. 4. Audible Watermarking (Optional): Consider adding a short, distinct sound to the TTS output. 5. Watermark Detection: Develop a function to detect and verify the watermark from audio files. 6. Testing: Thoroughly test watermarking (imperceptibility, robustness, quality impact) on TTS-generated audio. 7. Regular Review: Periodically review and update the watermarking technique.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious Audio Generation (Deepfakes): (Severity: High) Enables identification and attribution of synthetic audio.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious Audio Generation: Significantly reduces risk.

  • Currently Implemented: (Example: "No watermarking implemented.")

  • Missing Implementation: (Example: "Entire watermarking system needs implementation. Requires significant research.")

Mitigation Strategy: 3. Model Verification and Management (TTS Model Specific)

Description: 1. Source Verification: Download pre-trained TTS models only from official sources. 2. Checksum Verification: Verify the TTS model's checksum after download. 3. Version Control: Store TTS models in a version control system. 4. Secure Storage: Store TTS models securely with restricted access. 5. Regular Updates: Update TTS models with new releases, prioritizing security updates. 6. Model Scanning (Advanced - Optional): Explore techniques for scanning TTS models for anomalies. 7. Training Data Verification (If Training Custom Models): * Use a clean and verified dataset for TTS model training. * Vet external data sources for TTS training data. * Implement data sanitization for TTS training data. * Consider data provenance tracking for TTS training data. 8. Retraining (If Necessary): Retrain the TTS model from scratch with a verified dataset if poisoning is suspected.

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Model Poisoning/Backdooring: (Severity: High) Reduces the risk of using a compromised TTS model.

  • Impact:

    • Model Poisoning: Significantly reduces risk.

  • Currently Implemented: (Example: "Models downloaded from official source. Checksums verified. Stored in Git.")

  • Missing Implementation: (Example: "No model scanning. Need a process for regular model updates.")

Mitigation Strategy: 4. Output Verification (Human-in-the-Loop for TTS output)

  • Description:

    1. Establish Criteria: Define clear criteria for when human review is required. This might be based on:
      • Input text length exceeding a threshold.
      • Input text containing keywords from a sensitive list.
      • Specific user roles or request origins.
      • Random sampling of a percentage of requests.
    2. Review Interface: Create a user interface (UI) or workflow where designated reviewers can:
      • Listen to the generated audio.
      • View the original input text.
      • Approve or reject the audio.
      • Provide feedback or reasons for rejection.
    3. Integration with TTS Pipeline: Modify the TTS pipeline so that, based on the criteria in step 1, the generated audio is:
      • Not immediately returned to the user/requester.
      • Routed to the review interface.
      • Only released to the user/requester after approval.
    4. Audit Trail: Maintain a complete audit trail of all review actions, including:
      • Reviewer identity.
      • Timestamp of review.
      • Approval/rejection decision.
      • Any feedback provided.
    5. Training and Guidelines: Provide clear training and guidelines to reviewers on:
      • Identifying potentially harmful or inappropriate audio.
      • Recognizing deepfake characteristics.
      • Adhering to the established review criteria.
    6. Escalation Process: Define an escalation process for handling ambiguous or high-risk cases.
    7. Performance Monitoring: Monitor the performance of the human review process, including:
      • Review time.
      • Rejection rates.
      • Reviewer agreement (if multiple reviewers are used).

  • Threats Mitigated:

    • Malicious Audio Generation (Deepfakes): (Severity: High) - Provides a critical layer of defense against the generation of harmful or misleading audio, especially in high-stakes scenarios.
    • Model Poisoning/Backdooring (Indirectly): (Severity: Medium) - Can help detect unexpected or malicious outputs from a compromised model, even if input validation fails.

  • Impact:

    • Malicious Audio Generation: Very significantly reduces risk, especially for high-risk applications.
    • Model Poisoning: Moderately reduces the impact of a poisoned model.

  • Currently Implemented: (Example: "No human-in-the-loop verification implemented.")

  • Missing Implementation: (Example: "Entire human review process needs to be designed and implemented. Requires UI development and workflow integration.")