> I.e., represent a sequence of packets (of a particular type), rather than
representing the raw contents of a file?
> To do that, the generator of the fuzzed data would have to generate a
sequence of bytes in the form of a sequence of {byte count, bytes} blobs,
unless all packets were the same siz
Hello Peter,
>> I tried to run make in top directory and it failed for first try :-) I
>> checked the output and found that something changed in DNS dissector and
>> dns.flags.recdesired .. value="1" was in past and now value="".
>> It is probably about signed/unsigned value - not importan
Hi,
I've been assigned to be the guy to support this new VoIP system we're getting,
and I know that Wireshark has some VoIP analysis features. I have ok enough
background in networking, but VoIP is completely new to me.
If there's anyone with background in VoIP has any pointers on good ref
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:28 AM, Peter Wu wrote:
> > 2) Won't be good idea to allow skip a sample from automatic testing
> > (because it is for GUI demonstration)?
>
> You can invoke individual tests (which is most likely what you want when
> you are testing changes to a single dissector). GUI ve
On Dec 21, 2016, at 4:38 AM, Moshe wrote:
> I apologize for my lack of clarity. Peter is correct, I am interested in
> fuzzing dissectors.
>
> My plan is to have the sequence of raw bytes represent a pcap file.
I.e., represent a sequence of packets (of a particular type), rather than
represen
Hi Pavel,
2016-12-21 15:37 GMT+01:00 Pavel Strnad :
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to understand the difference in usage of NO_BOUND or UINT_MAX
> in the place of max parameter in dissect_per_constrained_integer()
> function. In my case aligned PER variant.
>
>
>
> From packet-per.h:
>
> #define NO_BOU
Hello,
I am trying to understand the difference in usage of NO_BOUND or UINT_MAX in
the place of max parameter in dissect_per_constrained_integer() function. In
my case aligned PER variant.
>From packet-per.h:
#define NO_BOUND -1
guint32 dissect_per_constrained_integer(tvbuff_t *tvb, guint3
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Moshe wrote:
> I apologize for my lack of clarity. Peter is correct, I am interested in
> fuzzing dissectors.
>
> My plan is to have the sequence of raw bytes represent a pcap file. There
> can be many packets in a single pcap, which would allow testing state
> in
I apologize for my lack of clarity. Peter is correct, I am interested in
fuzzing dissectors.
My plan is to have the sequence of raw bytes represent a pcap file. There
can be many packets in a single pcap, which would allow testing state
interactions.
Moshe
On Dec 21, 2016 6:19 AM, "Guy Harris"
On Dec 21, 2016, at 2:12 AM, Peter Wu wrote:
> From the efforts that I have seen, Moshe seems to be targeting the
> dissectors functions. Since these may appear over the network, it is
> probably one of the more interesting parts to tackle first.
Then I'm not sure how well
> The second step is
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 09:12:01AM +0100, Jirka Novak wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> first: happy-shark is very good idea. All notes above I would like to
> discuss and then I will try to add my samples with respect to conclusions...
>
> > For a basic testing framework, have a look at
> > https://githu
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 09:36:33PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
> On Dec 20, 2016, at 8:31 PM, Moshe wrote:
>
> > I've been working on adding Wireshark to Google's oss-fuzz project
>
> What do you mean by "Wireshark"?
>
> There are at least two parts of Wireshark that deal with externally-supplied
12 matches
Mail list logo
