Relational Symbolic Execution

Symbolic execution is a classical program analysis technique used to show that programs satisfy or violate given specifications. In this work we generalize symbolic execution to support program analysis for relational specifications in the form of relational properties - these are properties about two runs of two programs on related inputs, or about two executions of a single program on related inputs. Relational properties are useful to formalize notions in security and privacy, and to reason about program optimizations. We design a relational symbolic execution engine, named RelSym which supports interactive refutation, as well as proving of relational properties for programs written in a language with arrays and for-like loops

Self-composition by Symbolic Execution

This work is licensed under a CC-BY Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)urn: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-42770urn: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-42770Self-composition is a logical formulation of non-interference, a high-level security property that guarantees the absence of illicit information leakages through executing programs. In order to capture program executions, self-composition has been expressed in Hoare or modal logic, and has been proved (or refuted) by using theorem provers. These approaches require considerable user interaction, and verification expertise. This paper presents an automated technique to prove self-composition. We reformulate the idea of self-composition into comparing pairs of symbolic paths of the same program; the symbolic paths are given by Symbolic Execution. The result of our analysis is a logical formula expressing self-composition in first-order theories, which can be solved by off-the-shelf Satisfiability Modulo Theories solver

Improving Function Coverage with Munch: A Hybrid Fuzzing and Directed Symbolic Execution Approach

Fuzzing and symbolic execution are popular techniques for finding vulnerabilities and generating test-cases for programs. Fuzzing, a blackbox method that mutates seed input values, is generally incapable of generating diverse inputs that exercise all paths in the program. Due to the path-explosion problem and dependence on SMT solvers, symbolic execution may also not achieve high path coverage. A hybrid technique involving fuzzing and symbolic execution may achieve better function coverage than fuzzing or symbolic execution alone. In this paper, we present Munch, an open source framework implementing two hybrid techniques based on fuzzing and symbolic execution. We empirically show using nine large open-source programs that overall, Munch achieves higher (in-depth) function coverage than symbolic execution or fuzzing alone. Using metrics based on total analyses time and number of queries issued to the SMT solver, we also show that Munch is more efficient at achieving better function coverage.Comment: To appear at 33rd ACM/SIGAPP Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC). To be held from 9th to 13th April, 201

Symbolic Execution as DPLL Modulo Theories

© Quoc-Sang Phan; licensed under Creative Commons License CC-BY. Imperial College Computing Student Workshop (ICCSW’14). Editors: Rumyana Neykova and Nicholas Ng; pp. 58–65. OpenAccess Series in Informatics. Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl Publishing, Germanyurn: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-47746urn: urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-4774

Rethinking Pointer Reasoning in Symbolic Execution

Symbolic execution is a popular program analysis technique that allows seeking for bugs by reasoning over multiple alternative execution states at once. As the number of states to explore may grow exponentially, a symbolic executor may quickly run out of space. For instance, a memory access to a symbolic address may potentially reference the entire address space, leading to a combinatorial explosion of the possible resulting execution states. To cope with this issue, state-of-the-art executors concretize symbolic addresses that span memory intervals larger than some threshold. Unfortunately, this could result in missing interesting execution states, e.g., where a bug arises. In this paper we introduce MemSight, a new approach to symbolic memory that reduces the need for concretization, hence offering the opportunity for broader state explorations and more precise pointer reasoning. Rather than mapping address instances to data as previous tools do, our technique maps symbolic address expressions to data, maintaining the possible alternative states resulting from the memory referenced by a symbolic address in a compact, implicit form. A preliminary experimental investigation on prominent benchmarks from the DARPA Cyber Grand Challenge shows that MemSight enables the exploration of states unreachable by previous techniques

A Survey of Symbolic Execution Techniques

Many security and software testing applications require checking whether certain properties of a program hold for any possible usage scenario. For instance, a tool for identifying software vulnerabilities may need to rule out the existence of any backdoor to bypass a program's authentication. One approach would be to test the program using different, possibly random inputs. As the backdoor may only be hit for very specific program workloads, automated exploration of the space of possible inputs is of the essence. Symbolic execution provides an elegant solution to the problem, by systematically exploring many possible execution paths at the same time without necessarily requiring concrete inputs. Rather than taking on fully specified input values, the technique abstractly represents them as symbols, resorting to constraint solvers to construct actual instances that would cause property violations. Symbolic execution has been incubated in dozens of tools developed over the last four decades, leading to major practical breakthroughs in a number of prominent software reliability applications. The goal of this survey is to provide an overview of the main ideas, challenges, and solutions developed in the area, distilling them for a broad audience. The present survey has been accepted for publication at ACM Computing Surveys. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5FvcComment: This is the authors pre-print copy. If you are considering citing this survey, we would appreciate if you could use the following BibTeX entry: http://goo.gl/Hf5Fv