fuzzer | Ptrace fuzzer experiments
kandi X-RAY | fuzzer Summary
kandi X-RAY | fuzzer Summary
Code and approach is EXPERIMENTAL. YMMV. Ptrace fuzzer experiments based on Fuzzing at ca. 60k exec/s. I can imagine you can scale it even more with 25% drop per total cores. With 4 cores I achieved 60k exec/s (25% total drop, since 1 core was ca 20k). Below you can also see how I trigger Stack Protector with my crash. #fuzzing #speed Fuzzing older "Oniguruma" regular expression library. With shared memory corpus and increase of speed on one core to 50%, it could be even 90k exec per second (didn't try yet) on 4 cores.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of fuzzer
fuzzer Key Features
fuzzer Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on fuzzer
QUESTION
I'm learning my way around fuzz testing C applications. As I understand it, most of the time when fuzzing, one has a C function that takes/reads files. The fuzzer is given a valid sample file, mutates it randomly or with coverage heuristics, and executes the function with this new input.
But now I don't want to fuzz a function that takes file inputs but a few functions that together make up an API. For example:
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Feb-24 at 20:29To answer my own question:
Yes, that's how API fuzzing can be done.
For consuming the data bytewise the functions provided by libFuzzer #include
(C++) could be used. Problem with this: The crash dump and fuzzer corpus won't be human readable.
For a more readable fuzzer, implementing a structure aware custom data mutator for libFuzzer is beneficial.
I used the premade data mutator libprotobuf-mutator (C++) to fuzz the example API. It generates valid input data based on a protocol buffer definition and not just (semi) random bytes. It does make the fuzzing a bit slower though. The bug in the given contrived example API was found after ~2min, compared to ~30secs with the basic byte consuming setup. But I do think that it would scale much better for larger (real) API's.
QUESTION
Recently the Go team released a fuzzer https://blog.golang.org/fuzz-beta
Can you help to describe what I can expect from the fuzzer in terms of test goals?
How to apply the fuzzer?
Give some insight about how long we would run it before considering it good enough
How to correlate execution failure with the code (i expect having GB of results, I am wondering how overwhelming that could be and how to handle that)
See this intentionally terrific piece of code which would definitely need to be fuzzed
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Dec-16 at 09:46So, I dug a bit into the fuzz draft design. Here's some insights.
First, as recommended in the blog post, you have to run the Go tip:
QUESTION
I do not understand how symbolic execution is different from Whitebox fuzzing? From what I understand, Whitebox Fuzzers symbolically execute the code with some initial input format. Additionally, it will be helpful if someone could differentiate between these two forms with reference to KLEE and AFL tools.
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-08 at 16:13Whitebox fuzzing can be done not only with symbolic execution. SAGE from Microsoft Research is an example of a whitebox fuzzer that uses concolic execution, also called dynamic symbolic execution, see NDSS08.
Yes, Whitebox Fuzzers get some seed/seeds (initial input/inputs) and symbolically execute the code with these. Concolic fuzzers also run the code with these inputs in parallel with symbolic execution.
KLEE is a whitebox fuzzer that uses symbolic execution.
AFL is a greybox fuzzer - it uses internal structure information only to calculate coverage and not to get new paths. There are tools for AFL that get constants from comparisions in the code and add these to AFLs dictionaries, but this is still not whitebox fuzzing.
QUESTION
I'm a noob to fuzz area and looked AFL implementation.
AFL seems to replace stdin
file descriptor to input file
descriptor. Whenever the target program encounters standard input, the target program takes input from the input file
, not the stdin
.
So, my question is popped from on this.
Let's say we made a library and we'd like to unit test to find some implementation bug using fuzzer. In this case, we don't take any standard input
, just takes only function parameters from developers who use our library. Therefore, AFL doesn't work in this case.
Libfuzzer
seems proper solution in this case since generated input can be fed into our specific interesting function.
Is this right understand? or does AFL also can work as libfuzzer
for the unit test?
Thank you
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Aug-23 at 18:15Afl supports feeding inputs through files, not only stdin
. To test a library that receives input through arguments, you can write a simple executable that will open an input file, read it's contents, call the needed library functions with argument values read from this file and close the file.
QUESTION
I am trying to understand how code instrumentation works in LibFuzzer.
From the documentation, i get that I can choose different type of instrumentation with the option -fsanitize-coverage
.
When starting the fuzzer, the INFO
section indicates which instrumentation is used (here 8-bit counters)
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jun-24 at 13:17In this context, PC
means Program Counter
as explained in this blog post
In order to log coverage, the function trace_pc will log the program counter. With this information, the fuzzer knows, which paths are traversed on the given input values. Each fuzzing engine runs through this process differently.
QUESTION
So let me explain, I want to fuzz a closed source application named Y
that implements a custom protocol let's name the protocol X
. Y
is written in C.
Is there a way to patch the send/read
family functions to read from file instead of the socket?
Could this potentially work for the AFL/AFL++ fuzzer?
Keep in mind the application is developed for UNIX-like ecosystems.
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jun-07 at 22:23Yes, you can do that easily by making bridges between named pipes (fifos) and TCP connections through netcat.
Create two files (named pipes):
QUESTION
I'm implementing a fuzzer and I'd like to generate random unicode strings. I came up with this solution, however, it's very inefficient and seldomly produces some string. Is there a better way to generate unicode strings?
Thank you.
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Mar-25 at 18:04Use something like this:
QUESTION
docker build \
--tag gcr.io/fuzzbench/runners/afl/libpng-1.2.56-intermediate \
--build-arg BUILDKIT_INLINE_CACHE=1 \
--cache-from gcr.io/fuzzbench/runners/afl/libpng-1.2.56-intermediate \
--file fuzzers/afl/runner.Dockerfile \
fuzzers/afl
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Feb-22 at 12:26The simplest way to "port" a Docker image to Singularity is to build the Singularity image directly from the Docker image: singularity build libpng_1.2.56.sif docker://gcr.io/fuzzbench/runners/afl/libpng-1.2.56-intermediate
. If the source docker image has been built locally and is not in a remote registry use docker-daemon://
instead of docker://
.
The documentation also has a pretty sizable Singularity and Docker section that goes over using Docker images with Singularity and similarities/differences between a Singularity
definition file and a Dockerfile
.
If you want to maintain separate Dockerfile
and Singularity
files for creating images, keep in mind there is not always a direct equivalent. e.g,. --tag
in Docker is effectively equivalent to the filename of the Singularity image, buildkit settings are specific to the Docker build process and do not have a counterpart in Singularity.
QUESTION
anybody here? I have been working on using afl-qemu mode fuzzing IoT binaries. But I got a "Fork server handshake failed" problem when started to run the binary. I have read the previous related session but none of those fix my problem.
The information of the binary is here:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Feb-09 at 11:42You've tried to upgrade the version of QEMU that afl-qemu uses. Because afl-qemu makes modifications to QEMU's source, this is not a trivial thing to do. In particular, these commands that you commented out:
QUESTION
I am referring to https://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html to build the LLVM from its source code. I am using Ubuntu 18.04.
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Jan-09 at 07:17As mentioned in comments you are most likely running out of memory: by default all executables are linked statically so ld
s use a lot of RAM. There are several ways to counteract this:
Reduce link parallelism via
-DLLVM_PARALLEL_LINK_JOBS=1
to avoid starting too many links in parallel (BTW for generic codebase one could use ld-limiter to achieve the same).Reduce consumed memory by using either or both of
-Wl,-no-keep-memory
and-Wl,--reduce-memory-overheads
linker flags (add them toCMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS
).Switch to Gold (via
-fuse-ld=gold
) or lld (via-fuse-ld=lld
) linkers (add switch toCMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS
).In case you plan to frequently rebuild Clang (e.g. for debugging), you may use
-DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON
to use shared, instead of static, links. You'll no longer have OOMs and also incremental Clang builds are sped up by 100x (at the cost of 2-3x slower Clang runtimes).
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install fuzzer
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page