Same Coverage, Less Bloat: Accelerating Binary-only Fuzzing with Coverage-preserving Coverage-guided Tracing

16Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Coverage-guided fuzzing's aggressive, high-volume testing has helped reveal tens of thousands of software security flaws. While executing billions of test cases mandates fast code coverage tracing, the nature of binary-only targets leads to reduced tracing performance. A recent advancement in binary fuzzing performance is Coverage-guided Tracing (CGT), which brings orders-of-magnitude gains in throughput by restricting the expense of coverage tracing to only when new coverage is guaranteed. Unfortunately, CGT suits only a basic block coverage granularity - -yet most fuzzers require finer-grain coverage metrics: edge coverage and hit counts. It is this limitation which prohibits nearly all of today's state-of-the-art fuzzers from attaining the performance benefits of CGT. This paper tackles the challenges of adapting CGT to fuzzing's most ubiquitous coverage metrics. We introduce and implement a suite of enhancements that expand CGT's introspection to fuzzing's most common code coverage metrics, while maintaining its orders-of-magnitude speedup over conventional always-on coverage tracing. We evaluate their trade-offs with respect to fuzzing performance and effectiveness across 12 diverse real-world binaries (8 open- and 4 closed-source). On average, our coverage-preserving CGT attains near-identical speed to the present block-coverage-only CGT, UnTracer; and outperforms leading binary- and source-level coverage tracers QEMU, Dyninst, RetroWrite, and AFL-Clang by 2 - 24x, finding more bugs in less time.

Author supplied keywords

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nagy, S., Nguyen-Tuong, A., Hiser, J. D., Davidson, J. W., & Hicks, M. (2021). Same Coverage, Less Bloat: Accelerating Binary-only Fuzzing with Coverage-preserving Coverage-guided Tracing. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (pp. 351–365). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3460120.3484787

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free