Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Zi-Xuan Fu

dblp:380/8339 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
0009-0005-9167-3239ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Security and privacy · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Software testing · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Software testing › mutation testing
fault injection
0.812024
Testing Error Handling Code With Software Fault Injection and Error-Coverage-Guided Fuzzing · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2024
Software testing
fuzzing
0.812024
Testing Error Handling Code With Software Fault Injection and Error-Coverage-Guided Fuzzing · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2024
Software testing › fuzzing
coverage-guided fuzzing
0.212024
Testing Error Handling Code With Software Fault Injection and Error-Coverage-Guided Fuzzing · IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput. 2024

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

software fault injection · 0.8context-sensitive fuzzing · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Testing Error Handling Code With Software Fault Injection and Error-Coverage-Guided Fuzzing
abstract
Real-world programs require error handling code to handle various kinds of possible errors. However, these errors just infrequently occur due to special conditions, so error handling code is difficult to test. Coverage-guided fuzzing and software fault injection (SFI) are two common techniques that can test error handling code, but they still have major limitations. Specifically, existing fuzzing approaches generate program inputs guided by code coverage, but many occasional errors (such as insufficient memory) are unrelated to inputs, and code coverage cannot effectively reflect the execution contexts of these errors; existing SFI approaches often inject single or random faults, without exploring fault space or using program feedback. In this paper, we propose a new fuzzing framework named EH-Fuzz, to effectively test error handling code. EH-Fuzz uses a context-sensitive SFI-based fuzzing approach to explore fault space and perform fault injection, guided by a new metric namederror coverage. We evaluate EH-Fuzz on 9 user-level programs and 6 kernel-level modules, and find 45 new real bugs, 31 of which have been confirmed and fixed. We compare EH-Fuzz to existing fuzzing approaches (including AFL, AFL++, Syzkaller, FIZZER and FIFUZZ), and EH-Fuzz finds many real bugs missed by these approaches with higher testing coverage.
Jia-Ju Bai, Zi-Xuan Fu, Kai-Tao Xie, Zu-Ming Jiang
IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput.2