Paper detail

BeDivFuzz: Integrating Behavioral Diversity into Generator-based Fuzzing

A popular metric to evaluate the performance of fuzzers is branch coverage. However, we argue that focusing solely on covering many different branches (i.e., the richness) is not sufficient since the majority of the covered branches may have been exercised only once, which does not inspire a high confidence in the reliability of the covered code. Instead, the distribution of the executed branches (i.e., the evenness) should also be considered. That is, behavioral diversity is only given if the generated inputs not only trigger many different branches, but also trigger them evenly often with diverse inputs. We introduce BeDivFuzz, a feedback-driven fuzzing technique for generator-based fuzzers. BeDivFuzz distinguishes between structure-preserving and structure-changing mutations in the space of syntactically valid inputs, and biases its mutation strategy towards validity and behavioral diversity based on the received program feedback. We have evaluated BeDivFuzz on Ant, Maven, Rhino, Closure, Nashorn, and Tomcat. The results show that BeDivFuzz achieves better behavioral diversity than the state of the art, measured by established biodiversity metrics, namely the Hill numbers, from the field of ecology.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.