Re:Running LibFuzzer in a Browser, via WASM [pdf]
by saagarjha on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @04:25AM
(#21812012)
Are there any benefits of running the fuzzer in-browser rather than on a native binary? Does the fizzier exercise different code paths for each? Do other bugs pop up?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Running LibFuzzer in a Browser, via WASM [pdf]
by roddux on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @08:02AM
(#21813044)
The potential application is hinted at with the slide "OSS-Fuzz@Home". Akin to the SETI@Home* mass-distributed computing project, this has the potential to scale in a HUGE way. Anyone with a web browser could simply load the fuzzer and contribute cycles... No need for any big downloads, any installs, special software, configuration or anything! Just visit a page and you're golden.
I wonder if Google will actually build on this. It's a great idea.
Re:Running LibFuzzer in a Browser, via WASM [pdf]
by metzmanj on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @11:48AM
(#21815405)
I don't think we have plans to build this for now.
I find it a really cool idea, but for now, running fuzzers natively on Google Cloud with ClusterFuzz (https://github.com/google/clusterfuzz) suits our needs.
One challenge for the WASM approach is it will always be at least as hard to build a project for WASM as it is for native.
Re:Running LibFuzzer in a Browser, via WASM [pdf]
by saagarjha on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @11:14AM
(#21814981)
How would this work in practice? Most if not all browsers throttle background pages.
Re:Running LibFuzzer in a Browser, via WASM [pdf]
by metzmanj on Tuesday December 17, 2019 @11:40AM
(#21815310)
I haven't done a comprehensive study of this but in general I find that fuzzing programs in different environments (e.g. CPU architectures, OSes) tends to find some bugs that won't be found by fuzzing in just one environment.
But in general, I agree a lot of the bugs in WASM apps could be found by fuzzing their native versions.