Acquiring and analyzing exploits, which take advantage of vulnerabilities to conduct malicious actions, are crucial for victims (and defenders) when responding to system compromising incidents. However, exploits are sensitive and valuable assets that are not available to victims. The most common resource available for victims to investigate is network traffic, which covers the exploitation period. Thus reconstructing exploits from network traffic is demanded. In practice, the reconstruction process is performed manually, thus inefficient and non-scalable. In this article, we present an automated solutionTAICHIto reconstruct exploits from network traffic, able to generate replica exploits and facilitate timely incident analysis. By nature, a working exploit has to satisfy (1)path constraintswhich ensure the program path same as the original exploit's is explored and the same vulnerability is triggered, and (2)exploit constraintswhich ensure the same exploitation strategy is applied, e.g., to bypass deployed defenses or to stitch multiple gadgets together. We propose a hybrid solution to this problem by integrating techniques including multi-version execution (MVE), dynamic taint analysis (DTA), and concolic execution. We have implemented a prototype ofTAICHIon x86 and x86-64 Linux and tested it on the Cyber Grand Challenge (CGC) dataset, several Capture the Flag (CTF) challenges, and Metasploit exploit modules targeting real world applications. The evaluation results showed thatTAICHIcould reconstruct exploits efficiently with a high success rate. Moreover, it could be applied to production environments without disrupting running services, and could reconstruct exploits even if only one round of exploitation traffic is available.

Coverage-guided fuzzing is a widely used and effective solution to find software vulnerabilities. Tracking code coverage and utilizing it to guide fuzzing are crucial to coverage-guided fuzzers. However, tracking full and accurate path coverage is infeasible in practice due to the high instrumentation overhead. Popular fuzzers (e.g., AFL) often usecoarsecoverage information, e.g., edge hit counts stored in a compact bitmap, to achieve highly efficient greybox testing. Such inaccuracy and incompleteness in coverage introduce serious limitations to fuzzers. First, it causespath collisions, which prevent fuzzers from discovering potential paths that lead to new crashes. More importantly, it prevents fuzzers from making wise decisions on fuzzing strategies. In this article, we propose a coverage sensitive fuzzing solution CollAFL. It mitigates path collisions by providing more accurate coverage information, while still preserving low instrumentation overhead. It also utilizes the coverage information to apply three new fuzzing strategies, promoting the speed of discovering new paths and vulnerabilities. We implemented two variants of this solution, namely CollAFL (based on AFL) and CollAFL-bin (based on AFL-dyninst), to test applications with and without source code respectively, and evaluated them on 24 popular applications. The results showed that path collisions are common, i.e., up to 75 percent of edges could collide with others in some applications. But our solutions CollAFL and CollAFL-bin could reduce the edge collision ratio to nearly zero. Moreover, armed with the three fuzzing strategies, they outperform their counterparts (i.e., AFL and AFL-dyninst) in terms of both code coverage and vulnerability discovery. On average, CollAFL covered 20 percent more program paths, and found 320 percent more unique crashes and 260 percent more bugs than AFL in 200 hours. Moreover, CollAFL-bin covered 15 percent more paths, and found 200 percent more unique crashes and 150 percent more vulnerabilities than AFL-dyninst, showing that the proposed solution also works for binary application fuzzing. In total, CollAFL found 157 new security bugs with 95 new CVEs assigned.

Coverage-guided fuzzing is a widely used and effective solution to find software vulnerabilities. Tracking code coverage and utilizing it to guide fuzzing are crucial to coverage-guided fuzzers. However, tracking full and accurate path coverage is infeasible in practice due to the high instrumentation overhead. Popular fuzzers (e.g., AFL) often use coarse coverage information, e.g., edge hit counts stored in a compact bitmap, to achieve highly efficient greybox testing. Such inaccuracy and incompleteness in coverage introduce serious limitations to fuzzers. First, it causes path collisions, which prevent fuzzers from discovering potential paths that lead to new crashes. More importantly, it prevents fuzzers from making wise decisions on fuzzing strategies. In this paper, we propose a coverage sensitive fuzzing solution CollAFL. It mitigates path collisions by providing more accurate coverage information, while still preserving low instrumentation overhead. It also utilizes the coverage information to apply three new fuzzing strategies, promoting the speed of discovering new paths and vulnerabilities. We implemented a prototype of CollAFL based on the popular fuzzer AFL and evaluated it on 24 popular applications. The results showed that path collisions are common, i.e., up to 75% of edges could collide with others in some applications, and CollAFL could reduce the edge collision ratio to nearly zero. Moreover, armed with the three fuzzing strategies, CollAFL outperforms AFL in terms of both code coverage and vulnerability discovery. On average, CollAFL covered 20% more program paths, found 320% more unique crashes and 260% more bugs than AFL in 200 hours. In total, CollAFL found 157 new security bugs with 95 new CVEs assigned.

Promotional infection is an attack in which the adversary exploits a website's weakness to inject illicit advertising content. Detection of such an infection is challenging due to its similarity to legitimate advertising activities. An interesting observation we make in our research is that such an attack almost always incurs a great semantic gap between the infected domain (e.g., a university site) and the content it promotes (e.g., selling cheap viagra). Exploiting this gap, we developed a semantic-based technique, called Semantic Inconsistency Search (SEISE), for efficient and accurate detection of the promotional injections on sponsored top-level domains (sTLD) with explicit semantic meanings. Our approach utilizes Natural Language Processing (NLP) to identify the bad terms (those related to illicit activities like fake drug selling, etc.) most irrelevant to an sTLD's semantics. These terms, which we call irrelevant bad terms (IBTs), are used to query search engines under the sTLD for suspicious domains. Through a semantic analysis on the results page returned by the search engines, SEISE is able to detect those truly infected sites and automatically collect new IBTs from the titles/URLs/snippets of their search result items for finding new infections. Running on 403 sTLDs with an initial 30 seed IBTs, SEISE analyzed 100K fully qualified domain names (FQDN), and along the way automatically gathered nearly 600 IBTs. In the end, our approach detected 11K infected FQDN with a false detection rate of 1.5% and over 90% coverage. Our study shows that by effective detection of infected sTLDs, the bar to promotion infections can be substantially raised, since other non-sTLD vulnerable domains typically have much lower Alexa ranks and are therefore much less attractive for underground advertising. Our findings further bring to light the stunning impacts of such promotional attacks, which compromise FQDNs under 3% of .edu, .gov domains and over one thousand gov.cn domains, including those of leading universities such as stanford.edu, mit.edu, princeton.edu, havard.edu and government institutes such as nsf.gov and nih.gov. We further demonstrate the potential to extend our current technique to protect generic domains such as .com and .org.