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

What is the status of feedback-driven persistent fuzzing on macOS? #191

Closed
PaulGrandperrin opened this issue Feb 20, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

Comments

@PaulGrandperrin
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, I'm the author of honggfuzz-rs and I'm trying to make the project work on macOS.
My project is using feedback-driven persistent fuzzing and it's working great on Linux, but I got a very hard time making it work on macOS (in a High Sierra VM), so I'm wondering what's the status of this functionality on macOS.

Here is what I did:

So, in the end, I guess the mac specific code is not ready for this use case but I would like to be sure it's not a problem on my side.

I would be very happy to help to make this work on macOS. I can clean my patches that work with OS=posix and send you a PR if you want.

@robertswiecki
Copy link
Collaborator

The persistent fuzzing is not implemented in mac/ - it requires basically logic as in posix/ here -

https://github.com/google/honggfuzz/blob/master/posix/arch.c#L210

I.e. - waiting for signals about data on a persistent socket, or child process exit.

I'm in a process of getting MacOS box, so unless somebody will work on that first, I'll try to fix it next week.

@PaulGrandperrin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Awesome! So the code is indeed not ready yet but it looks like it's not very far.
I might try to do it tomorrow, is there anything else I might need to know?

@robertswiecki
Copy link
Collaborator

Yeah, it shouldn't be hard, assuming that MacOSX provides all necessary functionality (and, sometimes it doesn't as its relationship with POSIX seems complicated:). The directory for mac/ exists aside to posix/ because it contains additional crash analysis code, though it was @felixgr @anestisb and @tl0gic who implemented it, and not me, so I don't know that much about it.

@PaulGrandperrin
Copy link
Contributor Author

I guess we can now say that it's implemented and working so I'm closing!

This issue was closed.
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