Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fuzz: adds structure aware target #5993

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor

Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/4125

Describe changes:

  • adds structure aware fuzz target (aka fuzz suricata, not libpcap)

The point is to have a more efficient fuzzing discovering more code coverage and finding more bugs

To do so, it uses a fuzz-friendly format instead of libpcap
To test it you need the fuzzpcap dependency which can generate either generic pcap, or pcaps with only one tcp stream (computing sequence and acks automatically)
There is also a signature generation in this target, meant to produce more valid signatures.

Will work with oss-fuzz with https://github.com/catenacyber/oss-fuzz/tree/suricataware

Replaced #5967 re-adding fuzzpcap in LDADD

so as not to fuzz libpcap
and generate structure aware signatures
@catenacyber catenacyber requested a review from a team as a code owner March 23, 2021 10:21
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 23, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #5993 (fb17ba1) into master (cb150e9) will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5993      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   76.82%   76.77%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         612      612              
  Lines      188363   188363              
==========================================
- Hits       144709   144620      -89     
- Misses      43654    43743      +89     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 52.60% <ø> (-0.12%) ⬇️
suricata-verify 50.13% <ø> (-0.04%) ⬇️
unittests 63.01% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@victorjulien victorjulien mentioned this pull request Mar 29, 2021
@catenacyber
Copy link
Contributor Author

Merged in #6004

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant