HackerPapers

arXiv:1808.09700cs.CR

Evaluating Fuzz Testing

George Klees, Andrew Ruef, Benji Cooper, Shiyi Wei, Michael Hicks

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Fuzz testing has enjoyed great success at discovering security critical bugs in real software. Recently, researchers have devoted significant effort to devising new fuzzing techniques, strategies, and algorithms. Such new ideas are primarily evaluated experimentally so an important question is: What experimental setup is needed to produce trustworthy results? We surveyed the recent research literature and assessed the experimental evaluations carried out by 32 fuzzing papers. We found problems in every evaluation we considered. We then performed our own extensive experimental evaluation using an existing fuzzer. Our results showed that the general problems we found in existing experimental evaluations can indeed translate to actual wrong or misleading assessments. We conclude with some guidelines that we hope will help improve experimental evaluations of fuzz testing algorithms, making reported results more robust.

arXiv comments
Journal reference
Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS) 2018
DOI
Subjects
cs.CRCryptography and Security

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 2 HN submissions from Sep 2018 to Jul 2024. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.