Software systems powering OS kernels, basebands, bootloaders, firmware, IoT or automotive build the foundation of infrastructure that billions of people rely on every day. Testing these systems is crucial, especially as their complexity grows and they are often written in unsafe languages such as C/C++.

Electronic documents are widely used to store and share information such as bank statements, contracts, articles, maps and tax information. Many different applications exist for displaying a given electronic document, and users rightfully assume that documents will be rendered similarly independently of the application used. However, this is not always the case, and these inconsistencies, regardless of their causes—bugs in the application or the file itself—can become critical sources of miscommunication. In this paper, we present a study on the correctness of PDF documents and readers. We start by manually investigating a large number of real-world PDF documents to understand the frequency and characteristics of cross-reader inconsistencies, and find that such inconsistencies are common—13.5% PDF files are inconsistently rendered by at least one popular reader. We then propose an approach to detect and localize the source of such inconsistencies automatically. We evaluate our automatic approach on a large corpus of over 230 K documents using 11 popular readers and our experiments have detected 30 unique bugs in these readers and files. We also reported 33 bugs, some of which have already been confirmed or fixed by developers.

While developers are aware of the importance of comprehensively testing patches, the large effort involved in coming up with relevant test cases means that such testing rarely happens in practice. Furthermore, even when test cases are written to cover the patch, they often exercise the same behaviour in the old and the new version of the code. In this article, we present a symbolic execution-based technique that is designed to generate test inputs that cover the new program behaviours introduced by a patch. The technique works by executing both the old and the new version in the same symbolic execution instance, with the old version shadowing the new one. During this combined shadow execution, whenever a branch point is reached where the old and the new version diverge, we generate a test input exercising the divergence and comprehensively test the new behaviours of the new version. We evaluate our technique on the Coreutils patches from the CoREBench suite of regression bugs, and show that it is able to generate test inputs that exercise newly added behaviours and expose some of the regression bugs.

While developers are aware of the importance of comprehensively testing patches, the large effort involved in coming up with relevant test cases means that such testing rarely happens in practice. Furthermore, even when test cases are written to cover the patch, they often exercise the same behaviour in the old and the new version of the code.

Application crashes and errors that occur while loading a document are one of the most visible defects of consumer software. While documents become corrupted in various ways---from storage media failures to incompatibility across applications to malicious modifications---the underlying reason they fail to load in a certain application is that their contents cause the application logic to exercise an uncommon execution path which the software was not designed to handle, or which was not properly tested.