Source author record

Andrew E. Santosa

Andrew E. Santosa appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2018arXiv

Smart Greybox Fuzzing

Coverage-based greybox fuzzing (CGF) is one of the most successful methods for automated vulnerability detection. Given a seed file (as a sequence of bits), CGF randomly flips, deletes or bits to generate new files. CGF iteratively constructs (and fuzzes) a seed corpus by retaining those generated files which enhance coverage. However, random bitflips are unlikely to produce valid files (or valid chunks in files), for applications processing complex file formats. In this work, we introduce smart greybox fuzzing (SGF) which leverages a high-level structural representation of the seed file to generate new files. We define innovative mutation operators that work on the virtual file structure rather than on the bit level which allows SGF to explore completely new input domains while maintaining file validity. We introduce a novel validity-based power schedule that enables SGF to spend more time generating files that are more likely to pass the parsing stage of the program, which can expose vulnerabilities much deeper in the processing logic. Our evaluation demonstrates the effectiveness of SGF. On several libraries that parse structurally complex files, our tool AFLSmart explores substantially more paths (up to 200%) and exposes more vulnerabilities than baseline AFL. Our tool AFLSmart has discovered 42 zero-day vulnerabilities in widely-used, well-tested tools and libraries; so far 17 CVEs were assigned.

preprint2015arXiv

Comparing Weakest Precondition and Weakest Liberal Precondition

In this article we investigate the relationships between the classical notions of weakest precondition and weakest liberal precondition, and provide several results, namely that in general, weakest liberal precondition is neither stronger nor weaker than weakest precondition, however, given a deterministic and terminating sequential while program and a postcondition, they are equivalent. Hence, in such situation, it does not matter which definition is used.

preprint2011arXiv

Symbolic Execution for Verification

In previous work, we presented a symbolic execution method which starts with a concrete model of the program but progressively abstracts away details only when these are known to be irrelevant using interpolation. In this paper, we extend the technique to handle unbounded loops. The central idea is to progressively discover the strongest invariants through a process of loop unrolling. The key feature of this technique, called the minimax algorithm, is intelligent backtracking which directs the search for the next invariant. We then present an analysis of the main differences between our symbolic execution method and mainstream techniques mainly based on abstract refinement (CEGAR). Finally, we evaluate our technique against available state-of-the-art systems.