No abstract

Address space randomization is an emerging and promising method for stopping a broad range of memory corruption attacks. By randomly shifting critical memory regions at process initialization time, address space randomization converts an otherwise successful malicious attack into a benign process crash. However, existing approaches either introduce insufficient randomness, or require source code modification. While insufficient randomness allows successful brute-force attacks, as shown in recent studies, the required source code modification prevents this effective method from being used for commodity software, which is the major source of exploited vulnerabilities on the Internet. We propose Address Space Layout Permutation (ASLP) that introduces high degree of randomness (or high entropy) with minimal performance overhead. Essential to ASLP is a novel binary rewriting tool that can place the static code and data segments of a compiled executable to a randomly specified location and performs finegrained permutation of procedure bodies in the code segment as well as static data objects in the data segment. We have also modified the Linux operating system kernel to permute stack, heap, and memory mapped regions. Together, ASLP completely permutes memory regions in an application. Our security and performance evaluation shows minimal performance overhead with orders of magnitude improvement in randomness (e.g., up to 29 bits of randomness on a 32-bit architecture).

No abstract

Hybrid testing combines fuzz testing and concolic execution. It leverages fuzz testing to test easy-to-reach code regions and uses concolic execution to explore code blocks guarded by complex branch conditions. As a result, hybrid testing is able to reach deeper into program state space than fuzz testing or concolic execution alone. Recently, hybrid testing has seen significant advancement. However, its code coverage-centric design is inefficient in vulnerability detection. First, it blindly selects seeds for concolic execution and aims to explore new code continuously. However, as statistics show, a large portion of the explored code is often bug-free. Therefore, giving equal attention to every part of the code during hybrid testing is a non-optimal strategy. It slows down the detection of real vulnerabilities by over 43%. Second, classic hybrid testing quickly moves on after reaching a chunk of code, rather than examining the hidden defects inside. It may frequently miss subtle vulnerabilities despite that it has already explored the vulnerable code paths.We propose SAVIOR, a new hybrid testing framework pioneering a bug-driven principle. Unlike the existing hybrid testing tools, SAVIOR prioritizes the concolic execution of the seeds that are likely to uncover more vulnerabilities. Moreover, SAVIOR verifies all vulnerable program locations along the executing program path. By modeling faulty situations using SMT constraints, SAVIOR reasons the feasibility of vulnerabilities and generates concrete test cases as proofs. Our evaluation shows that the bug-driven approach outperforms mainstream automated testing techniques, including state-of-the-art hybrid testing systems driven by code coverage. On average, SAVIOR detects vulnerabilities 43.4% faster than DRILLER and 44.3% faster than QSYM, leading to the discovery of 88 and 76 more unique bugs, respectively. According to the evaluation on 11 well fuzzed benchmark programs, within the first 24 hours, SAVIOR triggers 481 UBSAN violations, among which 243 are real bugs.