Risk Estimation in Differential Fuzzing via Extreme Value Theory
Rafael Baez, Alejandro Olivas, Nathan K. Diamond, Marcelo F. Frias, Yannic Noller, Saeid Tizpaz-Niari
Abstract
Differential testing is a highly effective technique for automatically detecting software bugs and vulnerabilities when the specifications involve an analysis over multiple executions simultaneously. Differential fuzzing, in particular, operates as a guided randomized search, aiming to find (similar) inputs that lead to a maximum difference in software outputs or their behaviors. However, fuzzing, as a dynamic analysis, lacks any guarantees on the absence of bugs: from a differential fuzzing campaign that has observed no bugs (or a minimal difference), what is the risk of observing a bug (or a larger difference) if we run the fuzzer for one or more steps? This paper investigates the application of Extreme Value Theory (EVT) to address the risk of missing or underestimating bugs in differential fuzzing. The key observation is that differential fuzzing as a random process resembles the maximum distribution of observed differences. Hence, EVT, a branch of statistics dealing with extreme values, is an ideal framework to analyze the tail of the differential fuzzing campaign to contain the risk. We perform experiments on a set of real-world Java libraries and use differential fuzzing to find information leaks via side channels in these libraries. We first explore the feasibility of EVT for this task and the optimal hyperparameters for EVT distributions. We then compare EVT-based extrapolation against baseline statistical methods like Markov's as well as Chebyshev's inequalities, and the Bayes factor. EVT-based extrapolations outperform the baseline techniques in 14.3% of cases and tie with the baseline in 64.2% of cases. Finally, we evaluate the accuracy and performance gains of EVT-enabled differential fuzzing in real-world Java libraries, where we reported an average saving of tens of millions of bytecode executions by an early stop.
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.
Builds on12
- Evaluating Fuzz TestingGeorge Klees, Andrew Ruef, Benji Cooper, Shiyi Wei et al.CCS 2018 · 753 citations
- NEZHA: Efficient Domain-Independent Differential TestingTheofilos Petsios, Adrian Tang, Salvatore J. Stolfo, Angelos D. Keromytis et al.S&P 2017 · 132 citations
- Precise Detection of Side-Channel Vulnerabilities using Quantitative Cartesian Hoare LogicJia Chen, Yu Feng, Isil DilligCCS 2017 · 74 citations
- Estimating residual risk in greybox fuzzingMarcel Böhme, Danushka Liyanage, Valentin WüstholzFSE 2021 · 27 citations
- QFuzz: quantitative fuzzing for side channelsYannic Noller, Saeid Tizpaz-NiariISSTA 2021 · 15 citations
Related papers
- Data-Driven Debugging for Functional Side ChannelsSaeid Tizpaz-Niari, Pavol Cerný, Ashutosh TrivediNDSS 2020
- HyDiff: hybrid differential software analysisYannic Noller, Corina S. Pasareanu, Marcel Böhme, Youcheng Sun et al.ICSE 2020 · 37 citations
- Green Fuzzing: A Saturation-Based Stopping Criterion using Vulnerability PredictionStephan Lipp, Daniel Elsner, Severin Kacianka, Alexander Pretschner et al.ISSTA 2023 · 6 citations
- Reachable Coverage: Estimating Saturation in FuzzingDanushka Liyanage, Marcel Böhme, Chakkrit Tantithamthavorn, Stephan LippICSE 2023 · 14 citations
- Accounting for Missing Events in Statistical Information Leakage AnalysisSeongmin Lee, Shreyas Minocha, Marcel BöhmeICSE 2025 · 2 citations
