131 research outputs found

    Badger: Complexity Analysis with Fuzzing and Symbolic Execution

    Full text link
    Hybrid testing approaches that involve fuzz testing and symbolic execution have shown promising results in achieving high code coverage, uncovering subtle errors and vulnerabilities in a variety of software applications. In this paper we describe Badger - a new hybrid approach for complexity analysis, with the goal of discovering vulnerabilities which occur when the worst-case time or space complexity of an application is significantly higher than the average case. Badger uses fuzz testing to generate a diverse set of inputs that aim to increase not only coverage but also a resource-related cost associated with each path. Since fuzzing may fail to execute deep program paths due to its limited knowledge about the conditions that influence these paths, we complement the analysis with a symbolic execution, which is also customized to search for paths that increase the resource-related cost. Symbolic execution is particularly good at generating inputs that satisfy various program conditions but by itself suffers from path explosion. Therefore, Badger uses fuzzing and symbolic execution in tandem, to leverage their benefits and overcome their weaknesses. We implemented our approach for the analysis of Java programs, based on Kelinci and Symbolic PathFinder. We evaluated Badger on Java applications, showing that our approach is significantly faster in generating worst-case executions compared to fuzzing or symbolic execution on their own

    Exposing errors related to weak memory in GPU applications

    Get PDF
    © 2016 ACM.We present the systematic design of a testing environment that uses stressing and fuzzing to reveal errors in GPU applications that arise due to weak memory effects. We evaluate our approach on seven GPUS spanning three NVIDIA architectures, across ten CUDA applications that use fine-grained concurrency. Our results show that applications that rarely or never exhibit errors related to weak memory when executed natively can readily exhibit these errors when executed in our testing environment. Our testing environment also provides a means to help identify the root causes of such errors, and automatically suggests how to insert fences that harden an application against weak memory bugs. To understand the cost of GPU fences, we benchmark applications with fences provided by the hardening strategy as well as a more conservative, sound fencing strategy

    Hybrid Differential Software Testing

    Get PDF
    Differentielles Testen ist ein wichtiger Bestandteil der Qualitätssicherung von Software, mit dem Ziel Testeingaben zu generieren, die Unterschiede im Verhalten der Software deutlich machen. Solche Unterschiede können zwischen zwei Ausführungspfaden (1) in unterschiedlichen Programmversionen, aber auch (2) im selben Programm auftreten. In dem ersten Fall werden unterschiedliche Programmversionen mit der gleichen Eingabe untersucht, während bei dem zweiten Fall das gleiche Programm mit unterschiedlichen Eingaben analysiert wird. Die Regressionsanalyse, die Side-Channel Analyse, das Maximieren der Ausführungskosten eines Programms und die Robustheitsanalyse von Neuralen Netzwerken sind typische Beispiele für differentielle Softwareanalysen. Eine besondere Herausforderung liegt in der effizienten Analyse von mehreren Programmpfaden (auch über mehrere Programmvarianten hinweg). Die existierenden Ansätze sind dabei meist nicht (spezifisch) dafür konstruiert, unterschiedliches Verhalten präzise hervorzurufen oder sind auf einen Teil des Suchraums limitiert. Diese Arbeit führt das Konzept des hybriden differentiellen Software Testens (HyDiff) ein: eine hybride Analysetechnik für die Generierung von Eingaben zur Erkennung von semantischen Unterschieden in Software. HyDiff besteht aus zwei parallel laufenden Komponenten: (1) einem such-basierten Ansatz, der effizient Eingaben generiert und (2) einer systematischen Analyse, die auch komplexes Programmverhalten erreichen kann. Die such-basierte Komponente verwendet Fuzzing geleitet durch differentielle Heuristiken. Die systematische Analyse basiert auf Dynamic Symbolic Execution, das konkrete Eingaben bei der Analyse integrieren kann. HyDiff wird anhand mehrerer Experimente evaluiert, die in spezifischen Anwendungen im Bereich des differentiellen Testens ausgeführt werden. Die Resultate zeigen eine effektive Generierung von Testeingaben durch HyDiff, wobei es sich signifikant besser als die einzelnen Komponenten verhält.Differential software testing is important for software quality assurance as it aims to automatically generate test inputs that reveal behavioral differences in software. The concrete analysis procedure depends on the targeted result: differential testing can reveal divergences between two execution paths (1) of different program versions or (2) within the same program. The first analysis type would execute different program versions with the same input, while the second type would execute the same program with different inputs. Therefore, detecting regression bugs in software evolution, analyzing side-channels in programs, maximizing the execution cost of a program over multiple executions, and evaluating the robustness of neural networks are instances of differential software analysis with the goal to generate diverging executions of program paths. The key challenge of differential software testing is to simultaneously reason about multiple program paths, often across program variants, in an efficient way. Existing work in differential testing is often not (specifically) directed to reveal a different behavior or is limited to a subset of the search space. This PhD thesis proposes the concept of Hybrid Differential Software Testing (HyDiff) as a hybrid analysis technique to generate difference revealing inputs. HyDiff consists of two components that operate in a parallel setup: (1) a search-based technique that inexpensively generates inputs and (2) a systematic exploration technique to also exercise deeper program behaviors. HyDiff’s search-based component uses differential fuzzing directed by differential heuristics. HyDiff’s systematic exploration component is based on differential dynamic symbolic execution that allows to incorporate concrete inputs in its analysis. HyDiff is evaluated experimentally with applications specific for differential testing. The results show that HyDiff is effective in all considered categories and outperforms its components in isolation

    Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering

    Get PDF
    This open access book constitutes the proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering, FASE 2020, which took place in Dublin, Ireland, in April 2020, and was held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2020. The 23 full papers, 1 tool paper and 6 testing competition papers presented in this volume were carefully reviewed and selected from 81 submissions. The papers cover topics such as requirements engineering, software architectures, specification, software quality, validation, verification of functional and non-functional properties, model-driven development and model transformation, software processes, security and software evolution

    Cupid: Automatic Fuzzer Selection for Collaborative Fuzzing

    Get PDF
    Combining the strengths of individual fuzzing methods is an appealing idea to find software faults more efficiently, especially when the computing budget is limited. In prior work, EnFuzz introduced the idea of ensemble fuzzing and devised three heuristics to classify properties of fuzzers in terms of diversity. Based on these heuristics, the authors manually picked a combination of different fuzzers that collaborate. In this paper, we generalize this idea by collecting and applying empirical data from single, isolated fuzzer runs to automatically identify a set of fuzzers that complement each other when executed collaboratively. To this end, we present Cupid, a collaborative fuzzing framework allowing automated, data-driven selection of multiple complementary fuzzers for parallelized and distributed fuzzing. We evaluate the automatically selected target-independent combination of fuzzers by Cupid on Google's fuzzer-test-suite, a collection of real-world binaries, as well as on the synthetic Lava-M dataset. We find that Cupid outperforms two expert-guided, target-specific and hand-picked combinations on Google's fuzzer-test-suite in terms of branch coverage, and improves bug finding on Lava-M by 10%. Most importantly, we improve the latency for obtaining 95% and 99% of the coverage by 90% and 64%, respectively. Furthermore, Cupid reduces the amount of CPU hours needed to find a high-performing combination of fuzzers by multiple orders of magnitude compared to an exhaustive evaluation

    Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering

    Get PDF
    computer software maintenance; computer software selection and evaluation; formal logic; formal methods; formal specification; programming languages; semantics; software engineering; specifications; verificatio
    corecore