LspFuzz: Hunting Bugs in Language Servers
Hengcheng Zhu, Songqiang Chen, Valerio Terragni, Lili Wei, Yepang Liu, Jiarong Wu, Shing-Chi Cheung
Abstract
The Language Server Protocol (LSP) has revolutionized the integration of code intelligence in modern software development. There are approximately 300 LSP server implementations for various languages and 50 editors offering LSP integration. However, the reliability of LSP servers is a growing concern, as crashes can disable all code intelligence features and significantly impact productivity, while vulnerabilities can put developers at risk even when editing untrusted source code. Despite the widespread adoption of LSP, no existing techniques specifically target LSP server testing. To bridge this gap, we present LspFuzz, a grey-box hybrid fuzzer for systematic LSP server testing. Our key insight is that effective LSP server testing requires holistic mutation of source code and editor operations, as bugs often manifest from their combinations. To satisfy the sophisticated constraints of LSP and effectively explore the input space, we employ a two-stage mutation pipeline: syntax-aware mutations to source code, followed by context-aware dispatching of editor operations. We evaluated LspFuzz on four widely used LSP servers. LspFuzz demonstrated superior performance compared to baseline fuzzers, and uncovered previously unknown bugs in real-world LSP servers. Of the 51 bugs we reported, 42 have been confirmed, 26 have been fixed by developers, and two have been assigned CVE numbers. Our work advances the quality assurance of LSP servers, providing both a practical tool and foundational insights for future research in this domain.
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 d04920af-e2de-46c3-b398-59bd56b3d7f6Builds on23
- Evaluating Fuzz TestingGeorge Klees, Andrew Ruef, Benji Cooper, Shiyi Wei et al.CCS 2018 · 753 citations
- Skyfire: Data-Driven Seed Generation for FuzzingJunjie Wang, Bihuan Chen, Lei Wei, Yang LiuS&P 2017 · 382 citations
- IoTFuzzer: Discovering Memory Corruptions in IoT Through App-based FuzzingJiongyi Chen, Wenrui Diao, Qingchuan Zhao, Chaoshun Zuo et al.NDSS 2018 · 311 citations
- NAUTILUS: Fishing for Deep Bugs with GrammarsCornelius Aschermann, Tommaso Frassetto, Thorsten Holz, Patrick Jauernig et al.NDSS 2019 · 291 citations
- Fuzz4All: Universal Fuzzing with Large Language ModelsChunqiu Steven Xia, Matteo Paltenghi, Jia Le Tian, Michael Pradel et al.ICSE 2024 · 155 citations
Related papers
- One Engine to Fuzz 'em All: Generic Language Processor Testing with Semantic ValidationYongheng Chen, Rui Zhong, Hong Hu, Hangfan Zhang et al.S&P 2021 · 70 citations
- Fuzzing JavaScript Interpreters with Coverage-Guided Reinforcement Learning for LLM-Based MutationJueon Eom, Seyeon Jeong, Taekyoung KwonISSTA 2024 · 26 citations
- SemFuzz: A Semantics-Aware Fuzzing Framework for Network Protocol ImplementationsYanbang Sun, Quan Luo, Yuelin Wang, Qian Chen et al.WWW 2026
- GrayC: Greybox Fuzzing of Compilers and Analysers for CKarine Even-Mendoza, Arindam Sharma, Alastair F. Donaldson, Cristian CadarISSTA 2023 · 52 citations
- WITFuzz: Validity-Preserving Greybox Fuzzing for WebAssembly Interface Type Binding GeneratorsHanqin Guan, Ningyu He, Shangtong Cao, Yifeng Cai et al.ISSTA 2026
