On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 19:18 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 18:15, Luís Ferreira <cont...@lsferreira.net>
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2021-09-28 at 17:59 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > > On Tue, 28 Sept 2021 at 17:23, Luís Ferreira
> > > <cont...@lsferreira.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > During my fuzzing test with libfuzzer I found out that GCC is not
> > > > part
> > > > of OSS-Fuzz project. Would be cool to discuss here a bit more
> > > > about
> > > > fuzzing GCC codebase in order to mitigate some future
> > > > vulnerabilities
> > > > that may appear. I can volunteer myself to add the necessary
> > > > steps
> > > > to
> > > > fuzz GCC on the OSS Fuzz side, but I would like to get some
> > > > status
> > > > on:
> > > > 
> > > > - Does GCC build system support at least AFL or libfuzzer?
> > > > - Is there any infrastructure to automatically test this?
> > > > - How to test GCC with fuzzing, if possible
> > > 
> > > I'd like the libstdc++ <iostream> and <regex> code to get fuzzed,
> > > and
> > > maybe std::filesystem::path construction. I've discussed it with
> > > people before, but none of us got around to setting it up.
> > 
> > My idea would be to start with libiberty mangling, since it is what
> > I'm
> > tackling right now. this can be further expaneded to libstdc++, if
> > needed. Adding the infrastructure for that to automatically fuzz GCC
> > components easily, would be desired as a first step, IMO.
> 
> Loads and loads of people seem to fuzz the demangler, judging by the
> number of bugs that get reported against it with reproducers that
> obviously come from a fizzer.
> 
> It might be more useful to fuzz somethign else that everybody isn't
> already doing.

The problem right now is that those fuzzing tests need to be done by
hand. With the support of fuzzing + sanitization on the build system
and with OSS Fuzz this is done continuously by Google clusters.

I also see your point about prioritizing more critical things first.

-- 
Sincerely,
Luís Ferreira @ lsferreira.net

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to