Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC] In-kernel fuzz testing for apps | From | Laura Abbott <> | Date | Thu, 19 Nov 2015 09:25:51 -0800 |
| |
On 11/18/2015 03:39 PM, Andrey Utkin wrote: > Me and my friend have once talked about careful application development, > which includes awareness about all possible error conditions. > So we have collected ideas about making kernel (or, in some cases, libc) > "hostile" to careless application, and we present it so that the idea > doesn't get lost, and maybe even gets real if somebody wants some > features from the list. > > - (libc) crash instantly if memcpy detects regions overlapping; > - return EINTR as much as possible; > - send/recv/etc. returns EAGAIN on non-blocking sockets as much as possible; > - send/recv tend to result in short writes/reads, e.g. 1 byte at a time, > to break assumption about sending/receiving some "not-so-big" thing at once; > - let write return ENOSPC sometimes; > - scheduler behaves differently from common case (e.g. let it tend to > stop a thread at some syscalls); > - return allocation failures; > - make OOM killer manic! > - make clocks which are not monotonic to go backward frequently; > - pretend the time is 2038 year or later; > - (arguable) close syscall returns non-zero first time, or randomly; > - (arguable) special arch having NULL not all zero-bits. Actually I > don't believe it is feasible to make a lot of modern software to run in > such situation. > > These horrific modes should be enabled per-process or per-executable-file. > > Thanks for your time and for any kind comment. >
Check out CONFIG_FAULT_INJECTION, lib/fault_inject.c . There are a few things there already. You could expand on that for other functionality.
Thanks, Laura
| |