Linear-time Temporal Logic guided Greybox Fuzzing

Software model checking is a verification technique which is widely used for checking temporal properties of software systems. Even though it is a property verification technique, its common usage in practice is in "bug finding", that is, finding violations of temporal properties. Motivated by this observation and leveraging the recent progress in fuzzing, we build a greybox fuzzing framework to find violations of Linear-time Temporal Logic (LTL) properties. Our framework takes as input a sequential program written in C/C++, and an LTL property. It finds violations, or counterexample traces, of the LTL property in stateful software systems; however, it does not achieve verification. Our work substantially extends directed greybox fuzzing to witness arbitrarily complex event orderings. We note that existing directed greybox fuzzing approaches are limited to witnessing reaching a location or witnessing simple event orderings like use-after-free. At the same time, compared to model checkers, our approach finds the counterexamples faster, thereby finding more counterexamples within a given time budget. Our LTL-Fuzzer tool, built on top of the AFL fuzzer, is shown to be effective in detecting bugs in well-known protocol implementations, such as OpenSSL and Telnet. We use LTL-Fuzzer to reproduce known vulnerabilities (CVEs), to find 15 zero-day bugs by checking properties extracted from RFCs (for which 10 CVEs have been assigned), and to find violations of both safety as well as liveness properties in real-world protocol implementations. Our work represents a practical advance over software model checkers -- while simultaneously representing a conceptual advance over existing greybox fuzzers. Our work thus provides a starting point for understanding the unexplored synergies between software model checking and greybox fuzzing.Comment: To appear in International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) 202

STATIC CODE ANALYSIS

A lot of the defects that are present in a program are not visible to the compiler. Static code analysis is a way to find bugs and reduce the defects in a software application. This paper gives you an overview on static code analysis, well-known tools and the benefits of this practice.code, analysis

Towards Vulnerability Discovery Using Staged Program Analysis

Eliminating vulnerabilities from low-level code is vital for securing software. Static analysis is a promising approach for discovering vulnerabilities since it can provide developers early feedback on the code they write. But, it presents multiple challenges not the least of which is understanding what makes a bug exploitable and conveying this information to the developer. In this paper, we present the design and implementation of a practical vulnerability assessment framework, called Melange. Melange performs data and control flow analysis to diagnose potential security bugs, and outputs well-formatted bug reports that help developers understand and fix security bugs. Based on the intuition that real-world vulnerabilities manifest themselves across multiple parts of a program, Melange performs both local and global analyses. To scale up to large programs, global analysis is demand-driven. Our prototype detects multiple vulnerability classes in C and C++ code including type confusion, and garbage memory reads. We have evaluated Melange extensively. Our case studies show that Melange scales up to large codebases such as Chromium, is easy-to-use, and most importantly, capable of discovering vulnerabilities in real-world code. Our findings indicate that static analysis is a viable reinforcement to the software testing tool set.Comment: A revised version to appear in the proceedings of the 13th conference on Detection of Intrusions and Malware & Vulnerability Assessment (DIMVA), July 201

Applying Formal Methods to Networking: Theory, Techniques and Applications

Despite its great importance, modern network infrastructure is remarkable for the lack of rigor in its engineering. The Internet which began as a research experiment was never designed to handle the users and applications it hosts today. The lack of formalization of the Internet architecture meant limited abstractions and modularity, especially for the control and management planes, thus requiring for every new need a new protocol built from scratch. This led to an unwieldy ossified Internet architecture resistant to any attempts at formal verification, and an Internet culture where expediency and pragmatism are favored over formal correctness. Fortunately, recent work in the space of clean slate Internet design---especially, the software defined networking (SDN) paradigm---offers the Internet community another chance to develop the right kind of architecture and abstractions. This has also led to a great resurgence in interest of applying formal methods to specification, verification, and synthesis of networking protocols and applications. In this paper, we present a self-contained tutorial of the formidable amount of work that has been done in formal methods, and present a survey of its applications to networking.Comment: 30 pages, submitted to IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorial

Automatic Static Bug Detection for Machine Learning Libraries: Are We There Yet?

Automatic detection of software bugs is a critical task in software security. Many static tools that can help detect bugs have been proposed. While these static bug detectors are mainly evaluated on general software projects call into question their practical effectiveness and usefulness for machine learning libraries. In this paper, we address this question by analyzing five popular and widely used static bug detectors, i.e., Flawfinder, RATS, Cppcheck, Facebook Infer, and Clang static analyzer on a curated dataset of software bugs gathered from four popular machine learning libraries including Mlpack, MXNet, PyTorch, and TensorFlow with a total of 410 known bugs. Our research provides a categorization of these tools' capabilities to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tools for detecting software bugs in machine learning libraries. Overall, our study shows that static bug detectors find a negligible amount of all bugs accounting for 6/410 bugs (0.01%), Flawfinder and RATS are the most effective static checker for finding software bugs in machine learning libraries. Based on our observations, we further identify and discuss opportunities to make the tools more effective and practical