Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2208.11088

Evaluating Synthetic Bugs

Joshua Bundt·Andrew Fasano·Brendan Dolan-Gavitt·William Robertson·Tim Leek
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Fuzz testing has been used to find bugs in programs since the 1990s, but despite decades of dedicated research, there is still no consensus on which fuzzing techniques work best. One reason for this is the paucity of ground truth: bugs in real programs with known root causes and triggering inputs are difficult to collect at a meaningful scale. Bug injection technologies that add synthetic bugs into real programs seem to offer a solution, but the differences in finding these synthetic bugs versus organic bugs have not previously been explored at a large scale. Using over 80 years of CPU time, we ran eight fuzzers across 20 targets from the Rode0day bug-finding competition and the LAVA-M corpus. Experiments were standardized with respect to compute resources and metrics gathered. These experiments show differences in fuzzer performance as well as the impact of various configuration options. For instance, it is clear that integrating symbolic execution with mutational fuzzing is very effective and that using dictionaries improves performance. Other conclusions are less clear-cut; for example, no one fuzzer beat all others on all tests. It is noteworthy that no fuzzer found any organic bugs (i.e., one reported in a CVE), despite 50 such bugs being available for discovery in the fuzzing corpus. A close analysis of results revealed a possible explanation: a dramatic difference between where synthetic and organic bugs live with respect to the ''main path'' discovered by fuzzers. We find that recent updates to bug injection systems have made synthetic bugs more difficult to discover, but they are still significantly easier to find than organic bugs in our target programs. Finally, this study identifies flaws in bug injection techniques and suggests a number of axes along which synthetic bugs should be improved.

Explore related subjects

cs.CR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joshua Bundt, Andrew Fasano, Brendan Dolan-Gavitt, William Robertson, Tim Leek. 2022-08-23. Evaluating Synthetic Bugs. https://doi.org/10.1145/3433210.3453096

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

UPPRESSO: Untraceable and Unlinkable Privacy-PREserving Single Sign-On Services

Single sign-on (SSO) allows a user to maintain only the credential for an identity provider (IdP) to log into multiple relying parties (RPs). However, SSO introduces privacy threats, as (a) a curious IdP could track a user's all visits to RPs, and (b) colluding RPs could learn a user's online profile by linking her identities across these RPs. This paper presents a privacypreserving SSO scheme, called UPPRESSO, to protect an honest user's online profile against (a) an honest-but-curious IdP and (b) malicious RPs colluding with other users. UPPRESSO proposes an identity-transformation approach to generate untraceable ephemeral pseudo-identities for an RP and a user from which the target RP derives a permanent account for the user, while the transformations also provide unlinkability. This approach protects the identities of the user and the target RPs in a login flow, while working compatibly with widely-deployed SSO protocols and providing services accessed from a commercial-off-the-shelf browser without plug-ins or extensions. We built a prototype of UPPRESSO on top of MITREid Connect, an open-source SSO system. The extensive evaluations show that it fulfills the security and privacy requirements of SSO with reasonable overheads.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Attack Tree Distance: a practical examination of tree difference measurement within cyber security

Attack trees are a popular threat modeling method. In practice, there is often a need to compare attack tree models produced by human experts, based on both the structure of the tree and the meaning of the node labels. In this work, we investigate the problem of comparing attack trees and measuring their similarity. We define five different measures for measuring the distance between two attack trees: Label Distance (LD), Tree Edit Distance (TED), Radical Distance (RD), Multiset Distance (MSD) and Weighted Sum Distance (WSD). We further propose a repeatable method of both theoretical and experimental attack tree distance measures validation. Our theoretical validation consists of a series of basic transformations to evaluate the behavior of distance measures with respect to specific types of transformations that may appear between two attack trees. To experimentally validate our distance measures, we designed and executed a human study ($n=39$) to collect a dataset of attack trees to be used for evaluation and comparison of the measures. From our theoretical and experimental results, we find that applying semantic similarity as a means of comparing node labels is a valid approach. Further, we find four of the five attack tree distance measures are valid approaches in certain, varying circumstances. Our results suggest that these methods can already be used to identify similar real-world attack trees. Overall, this work lays the groundwork for improved threat model analysis, validation of AI-generated attack trees, and future research into threat similarity measurement in cybersecurity.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

Probabilistic Modeling of Jailbreak on Multimodal LLMs: From Quantification to Application

Recently, Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated their superior ability in understanding multimodal content. However, they remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks, which exploit weaknesses in their safety alignment to generate harmful responses. Previous studies categorize jailbreaks as successful or failed based on whether responses contain malicious content. However, given the stochastic nature of MLLM responses, this binary classification of an input's ability to jailbreak MLLMs is inappropriate. Derived from this viewpoint, we introduce jailbreak probability to quantify the jailbreak potential of an input, which represents the likelihood that MLLMs generated a malicious response when prompted with this input. We approximate this probability through multiple queries to MLLMs. After modeling the relationship between input hidden states and their corresponding jailbreak probability using Jailbreak Probability Prediction Network (JPPN), we use continuous jailbreak probability for optimization. Specifically, we propose Jailbreak-Probability-based Attack (JPA) that optimizes adversarial perturbations on input image to maximize jailbreak probability, and further enhance it as Multimodal JPA (MJPA) by including monotonic text rephrasing. To counteract attacks, we also propose Jailbreak-Probability-based Finetuning (JPF), which minimizes jailbreak probability through MLLM parameter updates. Extensive experiments show that (1) (M)JPA yields significant improvements when attacking a wide range of models under both white and black box settings. (2) JPF vastly reduces jailbreaks by at most over 60\%. Both of the above results demonstrate the significance of introducing jailbreak probability to make nuanced distinctions among input jailbreak abilities.

cs.CR↗