> That page appears to be blank.
>
> Is this:
>
>http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/pintool
>
> the Pin to which you were apparently referring?
Sorry, link is fixed.
Yes, it is.
___
Sent via:Wireshark-dev ma
On Apr 15, 2013, at 1:17 PM, Sonny Tavernier wrote:
> I worked on a proposal for the project "Improved Fuzzing": an improved
> fuzzing function which aims to improve the efficiency and the coverage of the
> tests.
>
> The more the input trace files are diverse and varied, the more it will be
> I'm not familiar with PIN but I from your proposal I understand it's
> something like the valgrind framework? The idea is certainly an
> interesting one, though if my understanding is correct it sounds like
> an awful lot of work for one summer - I could be wrong though.
Thank you for your quic
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Sonny Tavernier
wrote:
> Hi Evan,
>
> I worked on a proposal for the project "Improved Fuzzing": an improved
> fuzzing function which aims to improve the efficiency and the coverage of
> the tests.
>
> The more the input trace files are diverse and varied, the more
Hi Evan,
I worked on a proposal for the project "Improved Fuzzing": an improved
fuzzing function which aims to improve the efficiency and the coverage of
the tests.
The more the input trace files are diverse and varied, the more it will be
effective, so it seems your idea is complementary to my p
Just a quick idea I had that I don't plan to work on in the near
future. Perhaps one of the GSOC students interested in improving our
fuzzing could pick this up since it is somewhat related.
Our randpkt tester is great but currently only covers 22 protocols at
a quick count. An easy way to extend
