2023
DOI: 10.1109/access.2022.3233875
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Seed Scheduling Method With a Reinforcement Learning for a Coverage Guided Fuzzing

Abstract: Seed scheduling, which determines which seed is input to the fuzzer first and the number of mutated test cases that are generated for the input seed, significantly influences crash detection performance in fuzz testing. Even for the same fuzzer, the performance in terms of detecting crashes that cause program failure varies considerably depending on the seed-scheduling method used. Most existing coverage-guided fuzzers use a heuristic seed-scheduling method. These heuristic methods can't properly determine the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At present, coverage-based fuzzing tools do not differentiate the importance of different code coverage segments, irrespective of the functionality of code calls and their potential security impacts. Therefore, all input samples that aid in discovering new statements or code conversions will be saved for future mutations [20]. Although this approach may be deemed acceptable in software testing for achieving thorough code coverage, it is considered ineffective in identifying vulnerabilities.…”
Section: Frequency and Danger Based Path Value Evaluation Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, coverage-based fuzzing tools do not differentiate the importance of different code coverage segments, irrespective of the functionality of code calls and their potential security impacts. Therefore, all input samples that aid in discovering new statements or code conversions will be saved for future mutations [20]. Although this approach may be deemed acceptable in software testing for achieving thorough code coverage, it is considered ineffective in identifying vulnerabilities.…”
Section: Frequency and Danger Based Path Value Evaluation Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent studies have shown that GANs, especially StyleGAN2, 24 are highly effective in producing synthetic data for defect detection tasks 25 , 26 . Our research also leverages StyleGAN2 to create synthetic defects superimposed on real background images.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%