full-disclosure - Re: Distributed Fuzzing?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <44D0E855.23970.670E831C@nick.virus-l.demon.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2006 18:00:53 +1200
From: Nick FitzGerald <nick@...us-l.demon.co.uk>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: Distributed Fuzzing?

CrYpTiC MauleR wrote:

> After seeing HDM's browser fuzzing I was wondering would it be practical
> to do this on a large scale like using http://boinc.berkeley.edu/ to fuzz
> applications and find more bugs. Just an idea O.O

"practical" as in "feasibly doable"?  I'm sure.

"practical" as in "likely to be very successful"?  I doubt it.

The point of what you're testing is to upset/break/destabilize/crash 
the process under test -- I can't see the side-effects of that making 
it a very "popular" project amonsgt typical BOINC, etc users.

That's not to say that a collaborative effort combining the test 
machines of those willing to participate in that manner would not be 
practical, but I can't see it being terribly successful as a BOINC 
project (or BOINC being very keen on it!).

Regards,

Nick FitzGerald

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/