Guiding Greybox Fuzzing with Mutation Testing
Vasudev Vikram, Isabella Laybourn, Ao Li, Nicole Nair, Kelton OBrien, Rafaello Sanna, Rohan Padhye
Abstract
Greybox fuzzing and mutation testing are two popular but mostly independent fields of software testing research that have so far had limited overlap. Greybox fuzzing, generally geared towards searching for new bugs, predominantly uses code coverage for selecting inputs to save. Mutation testing is primarily used as a stronger alternative to code coverage in assessing the quality of regression tests; the idea is to evaluate tests for their ability to identify artificially injected faults in the target program. But what if we wanted to use greybox fuzzing to synthesize high-quality regression tests? In this paper, we develop and evaluate Mu2, a Java-based framework for incorporating mutation analysis in the greybox fuzzing loop, with the goal of producing a test-input corpus with a high mutation score. Mu2 makes use of a differential oracle for identifying inputs that exercise interesting program behavior without causing crashes. This paper describes several dynamic optimizations implemented in Mu2 to overcome the high cost of performing mutation analysis with every fuzzer-generated input. These optimizations introduce trade-offs in fuzzing throughput and mutation killing ability, which we evaluate empirically on five real-world Java benchmarks. Overall, variants of Mu2 are able to synthesize test-input corpora with a higher mutation score than state-of-the-art Java fuzzer Zest. CCS CONCEPTS • Software and its engineering → Software testing and debugging.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 078ed4fe-98ce-4a8b-b6b4-38f34ffb0206Cited by top-tier papers3
- Benchmarking Automated Program Repair: An Extensive Study on Both Real-World and Artificial BugsYicheng Ouyang, Jun Yang, Lingming ZhangISSTA 2024 · 8 citations
- Fuzzing for CPS Mutation TestingJaekwon Lee, Enrico Viganò, Oscar Cornejo, Fabrizio Pastore et al.ASE 2023 · 4 citations
- Systematic Assessment of Fuzzers using Mutation AnalysisPhilipp Görz, Björn Mathis, Keno Hassler, Emre Güler et al.USENIX Security 2023
Builds on19
- Coverage-based Greybox Fuzzing as Markov ChainMarcel Böhme, Van-Thuan Pham, Abhik RoychoudhuryCCS 2016 · 1,026 citations
- Directed Greybox FuzzingMarcel Böhme, Van-Thuan Pham, Manh-Dung Nguyen, Abhik RoychoudhuryCCS 2017 · 836 citations
- Evaluating Fuzz TestingGeorge Klees, Andrew Ruef, Benji Cooper, Shiyi Wei et al.CCS 2018 · 753 citations
- Angora: Efficient Fuzzing by Principled SearchPeng Chen, Hao ChenS&P 2018 · 616 citations
- REDQUEEN: Fuzzing with Input-to-State CorrespondenceCornelius Aschermann, Sergej Schumilo, Tim Blazytko, Robert Gawlik et al.NDSS 2019 · 413 citations
Related papers
- GrayC: Greybox Fuzzing of Compilers and Analysers for CKarine Even-Mendoza, Arindam Sharma, Alastair F. Donaldson, Cristian CadarISSTA 2023 · 52 citations
- On Interaction Effects in Greybox FuzzingKonstantinos Kitsios, Marcel Böhme, Alberto BacchelliICSE 2026
- MC2: Rigorous and Efficient Directed Greybox FuzzingAbhishek Shah, Dongdong She, Samanway Sadhu, Krish Singal et al.CCS 2022 · 15 citations
- An Empirical Examination of Fuzzer Mutator PerformanceJames Kukucka, Luís Pina, Paul Ammann, Jonathan BellISSTA 2024 · 4 citations
- Seed selection for successful fuzzingAdrian Herrera, Hendra Gunadi, Shane Magrath, Michael Norrish et al.ISSTA 2021 · 95 citations
