Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Question: fuzzing testing integration #2887

Closed
tyler92 opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Question: fuzzing testing integration #2887

tyler92 opened this issue Jun 17, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@tyler92
Copy link
Contributor

tyler92 commented Jun 17, 2024

Hi,

I recently created a PR for Boost.Beast fuzzing in the Google OSS-Fuzz repository. This PR includes three fuzzing targets: the HTTP request parser, the HTTP response parser, and the WebSocket server. I find these targets quite useful, e.g. they found #2881 and #2861 (reported not by me) using AddressSanitizer.

As far as I understood, it’s better to have fuzzing targets in the upstream repo rather than just in OSS-Fuzz. It keeps everything in one place and makes it easier to keep the fuzzing targets up to date with any changes.

Would you be open to integrating these fuzzing targets into the Beast repo? I’m happy to help with the initial setup. This would mean:

  • Adding the *.cc files for the fuzzing targets
  • Including a "corpus" of sample input data for the fuzzers
  • Optionally setting up an automatic CI job to run the fuzzers on each PR

Let me know what you think.

@ashtum
Copy link
Collaborator

ashtum commented Jun 18, 2024

It would be great if we could add Boost.Beast to OSS-Fuzz. As you mentioned, #2881 and #2861 showed there is always a chance of finding new bugs. You can use Boost.URL as a reference for where to add the required files: https://github.com/boostorg/url/tree/develop/test/fuzz

Optionally setting up an automatic CI job to run the fuzzers on each PR

Currently, we have an overloaded GitHub Action CI. However, I believe we can add that to Drone. I'll take care of this part.

@tyler92
Copy link
Contributor Author

tyler92 commented Jun 18, 2024

Great! I will open a PR and I hope we will do it step by step.

@tyler92 tyler92 mentioned this issue Jun 18, 2024
4 tasks
@ashtum
Copy link
Collaborator

ashtum commented Jun 22, 2024

Addressed in #2888 and #2891.

@ashtum ashtum closed this as completed Jun 22, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants