Combining Static and Dynamic Analysis for Vulnerability Detection

In this paper, we present a hybrid approach for buffer overflow detection in C code. The approach makes use of static and dynamic analysis of the application under investigation. The static part consists in calculating taint dependency sequences (TDS) between user controlled inputs and vulnerable statements. This process is akin to program slice of interest to calculate tainted data- and control-flow path which exhibits the dependence between tainted program inputs and vulnerable statements in the code. The dynamic part consists of executing the program along TDSs to trigger the vulnerability by generating suitable inputs. We use genetic algorithm to generate inputs. We propose a fitness function that approximates the program behavior (control flow) based on the frequencies of the statements along TDSs. This runtime aspect makes the approach faster and accurate. We provide experimental results on the Verisec benchmark to validate our approach.Comment: There are 15 pages with 1 figur

Badger: Complexity Analysis with Fuzzing and Symbolic Execution

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

Harvey: A Greybox Fuzzer for Smart Contracts

We present Harvey, an industrial greybox fuzzer for smart contracts, which are programs managing accounts on a blockchain. Greybox fuzzing is a lightweight test-generation approach that effectively detects bugs and security vulnerabilities. However, greybox fuzzers randomly mutate program inputs to exercise new paths; this makes it challenging to cover code that is guarded by narrow checks, which are satisfied by no more than a few input values. Moreover, most real-world smart contracts transition through many different states during their lifetime, e.g., for every bid in an auction. To explore these states and thereby detect deep vulnerabilities, a greybox fuzzer would need to generate sequences of contract transactions, e.g., by creating bids from multiple users, while at the same time keeping the search space and test suite tractable. In this experience paper, we explain how Harvey alleviates both challenges with two key fuzzing techniques and distill the main lessons learned. First, Harvey extends standard greybox fuzzing with a method for predicting new inputs that are more likely to cover new paths or reveal vulnerabilities in smart contracts. Second, it fuzzes transaction sequences in a targeted and demand-driven way. We have evaluated our approach on 27 real-world contracts. Our experiments show that the underlying techniques significantly increase Harvey's effectiveness in achieving high coverage and detecting vulnerabilities, in most cases orders-of-magnitude faster; they also reveal new insights about contract code.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1807.0787

SlowFuzz: Automated Domain-Independent Detection of Algorithmic Complexity Vulnerabilities

Algorithmic complexity vulnerabilities occur when the worst-case time/space complexity of an application is significantly higher than the respective average case for particular user-controlled inputs. When such conditions are met, an attacker can launch Denial-of-Service attacks against a vulnerable application by providing inputs that trigger the worst-case behavior. Such attacks have been known to have serious effects on production systems, take down entire websites, or lead to bypasses of Web Application Firewalls. Unfortunately, existing detection mechanisms for algorithmic complexity vulnerabilities are domain-specific and often require significant manual effort. In this paper, we design, implement, and evaluate SlowFuzz, a domain-independent framework for automatically finding algorithmic complexity vulnerabilities. SlowFuzz automatically finds inputs that trigger worst-case algorithmic behavior in the tested binary. SlowFuzz uses resource-usage-guided evolutionary search techniques to automatically find inputs that maximize computational resource utilization for a given application.Comment: ACM CCS '17, October 30-November 3, 2017, Dallas, TX, US

A New View on Classification of Software Vulnerability Mitigation Methods

Software vulnerability mitigation is a well-known research area and many methods have been proposed for it Some papers try to classify these methods from different specific points of views In this paper we aggregate all proposed classifications and present a comprehensive classification of vulnerability mitigation methods We define software vulnerability as a kind of software fault and correspond the classes of software vulnerability mitigation methods accordingly In this paper the software vulnerability mitigation methods are classified into vulnerability prevention vulnerability tolerance vulnerability removal and vulnerability forecasting We define each vulnerability mitigation method in our new point of view and indicate some methods for each class Our general point of view helps to consider all of the proposed methods in this review We also identify the fault mitigation methods that might be effective in mitigating the software vulnerabilities but are not yet applied in this area Based on that new directions are suggested for the future researc