CUTE: A Concolic Unit Testing Engine for C Koushik SenDarko MarinovGul Agha University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Automated Test Data Generation Maili Markvardt. Outline Introduction Test data generation problem Black-box approach White-box approach.
Advertisements

Automated Verification with HIP and SLEEK Asankhaya Sharma.
Masahiro Fujita Yoshihisa Kojima University of Tokyo May 2, 2008
Symbolic Execution with Mixed Concrete-Symbolic Solving
Satisfiability Modulo Theories (An introduction)
PLDI’2005Page 1June 2005 Example (C code) int double(int x) { return 2 * x; } void test_me(int x, int y) { int z = double(x); if (z==y) { if (y == x+10)
Data-Flow Analysis Framework Domain – What kind of solution is the analysis looking for? Ex. Variables have not yet been defined – Algorithm assigns a.
Parallel Symbolic Execution for Structural Test Generation Matt Staats Corina Pasareanu ISSTA 2010.
1 Symbolic Execution for Model Checking and Testing Corina Păsăreanu (Kestrel) Joint work with Sarfraz Khurshid (MIT) and Willem Visser (RIACS)
1/20 Generalized Symbolic Execution for Model Checking and Testing Charngki PSWLAB Generalized Symbolic Execution for Model Checking and Testing.
Symbolic execution © Marcelo d’Amorim 2010.
Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA Instructor: Thomas Wies Spring 2012 Lecture 13.
CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 10: Nested Depth First Search, Counter- Example Generation Revisited, Bit-State Hashing, On-The-Fly Model Checking.
A survey of techniques for precise program slicing Komondoor V. Raghavan Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
Hybrid Concolic Testing Rupak Majumdar Koushik Sen UC Los Angeles UC Berkeley.
Dynamic Symbolic Execution CS 8803 FPL Oct 31, 2012 (Slides adapted from Koushik Sen) 1.
Compiler Construction
CSE503: SOFTWARE ENGINEERING SYMBOLIC TESTING, AUTOMATED TEST GENERATION … AND MORE! David Notkin Spring 2011.
CIS 101: Computer Programming and Problem Solving Lecture 8 Usman Roshan Department of Computer Science NJIT.
1 Today Another approach to “coverage” Cover “everything” – within a well-defined, feasible limit Bounded Exhaustive Testing.
Program Analysis Using Randomization Sumit Gulwani, George Necula (U.C. Berkeley)
PLDI’2005Page 1June 2005 DART: Directed Automated Random Testing Patrice Godefroid Nils Klarlund Koushik Sen Bell Labs Bell Labs UIUC.
DART Directed Automated Random Testing Patrice Godefroid, Nils Klarlund, and Koushik Sen Syed Nabeel.
Evaluation of DART DART: Directed Automated Random Testing Godefroid, Klarlund, Sen.
272: Software Engineering Fall 2012 Instructor: Tevfik Bultan Lecture 4: SMT-based Bounded Model Checking of Concurrent Software.
Automating Software Testing Using Program Analysis -Patrice Godefroid, Peli de Halleux, Aditya V. Nori, Sriram K. Rajamani,Wolfram Schulte, and Nikolai.
Topics in Software Dynamic White-box Testing Part 2: Data-flow Testing
DART: Directed Automated Random Testing Koushik Sen University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Joint work with Patrice Godefroid and Nils Klarlund.
Tao Xie (North Carolina State University) Nikolai Tillmann, Jonathan de Halleux, Wolfram Schulte (Microsoft Research, Redmond WA, USA)
Symbolic Execution with Mixed Concrete-Symbolic Solving (SymCrete Execution) Jonathan Manos.
CUTE: A Concolic Unit Testing Engine for C Technical Report Koushik SenDarko MarinovGul Agha University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
CS265: Program Analysis, Testing, and Debugging
Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing (NDSS 2008) Presented by: Edmund Warner University of Central Florida April 7, 2011 David Molnar UC Berkeley
White-box Testing.
1 Program Testing (Lecture 14) Prof. R. Mall Dept. of CSE, IIT, Kharagpur.
CSV 889: Concurrent Software Verification Subodh Sharma Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Symbolic Execution.
Symbolic Execution with Abstract Subsumption Checking Saswat Anand College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology Corina Păsăreanu QSS, NASA Ames.
Xusheng Xiao North Carolina State University CSC 720 Project Presentation 1.
Learning Symbolic Interfaces of Software Components Zvonimir Rakamarić.
CSV 889: Concurrent Software Verification Subodh Sharma Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Scalable Symbolic Execution: KLEE.
Symbolic and Concolic Execution of Programs Information Security, CS 526 Omar Chowdhury 10/7/2015Information Security, CS 5261.
CS265: Dynamic Partial Order Reduction Koushik Sen UC Berkeley.
Semantic Analysis II Type Checking EECS 483 – Lecture 12 University of Michigan Wednesday, October 18, 2006.
Static Techniques for V&V. Hierarchy of V&V techniques Static Analysis V&V Dynamic Techniques Model Checking Simulation Symbolic Execution Testing Informal.
Introduction to Software Analysis CS Why Take This Course? Learn methods to improve software quality – reliability, security, performance, etc.
/ PSWLAB Evidence-Based Analysis and Inferring Preconditions for Bug Detection By D. Brand, M. Buss, V. C. Sreedhar published in ICSM 2007.
Lazy Annotation for Program Testing and Verification (Supplementary Materials) Speaker: Chen-Hsuan Adonis Lin Advisor: Jie-Hong Roland Jiang December 3,
1 Validation of Security Protocols Joint work with Gul Agha, Michael Greenwald, Carl Gunter, Sanjeev Khanna, Darko Marinov, Jose Meseguer, Prasanna Thati,
Dynamic Symbolic Execution (aka, directed automated random testing, aka concolic execution) Slides by Koushik Sen.
Random Test Generation of Unit Tests: Randoop Experience
Week 6 MondayTuesdayWednesdayThursdayFriday Testing III Reading due Group meetings Testing IVSection ZFR due ZFR demos Progress report due Readings out.
CSE 331 SOFTWARE DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION SYMBOLIC TESTING Autumn 2011.
Symstra: A Framework for Generating Object-Oriented Unit Tests using Symbolic Execution Tao Xie, Darko Marinov, Wolfram Schulte, and David Notkin University.
Finding bugs with a constraint solver daniel jackson. mandana vaziri mit laboratory for computer science issta 2000.
White-Box Testing Statement coverage Branch coverage Path coverage
Software Testing.
Control Flow Testing Handouts
Structural testing, Path Testing
Types of Testing Visit to more Learning Resources.
DART and CUTE: Concolic Testing
Automated Software Analysis Techniques For High Reliability: A Concolic Testing Approach Moonzoo Kim.
White-Box Testing Using Pex
Software Testing (Lecture 11-a)
Dynamic Symbolic Execution
All You Ever Wanted to Know About Dynamic Taint Analysis & Forward Symbolic Execution (but might have been afraid to ask) Edward J. Schwartz, Thanassis.
Elided to examples only
Automatic Test Generation SymCrete
Automated Software Analysis Techniques For High Reliability: A Concolic Testing Approach Moonzoo Kim.
Example (C code) int double(int x) { return 2 * x; }
CUTE: A Concolic Unit Testing Engine for C
Presentation transcript:

CUTE: A Concolic Unit Testing Engine for C Koushik SenDarko MarinovGul Agha University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

2 Goal Automated Scalable Unit Testing of real- world C Programs  Generate test inputs  Execute unit under test on generated test inputs so that all reachable statements are executed  Any assertion violation gets caught

3 Goal Automated Scalable Unit Testing of real- world C Programs  Generate test inputs  Execute unit under test on generated test inputs so that all reachable statements are executed  Any assertion violation gets caught Our Approach:  Explore all execution paths of an Unit for all possible inputs Exploring all execution paths ensure that all reachable statements are executed

4 Execution Paths of a Program Can be seen as a binary tree with possibly infinite depth  Computation tree Each node represents the execution of a “if then else” statement Each edge represents the execution of a sequence of non-conditional statements Each path in the tree represents an equivalence class of inputs

5 Example of Computation Tree void test_me(int x, int y) { if(2*x==y){ if(x != y+10){ printf(“I am fine here”); } else { printf(“I should not reach here”); ERROR; } 2*x==y x!=y+10 NY NY ERROR

6 Existing Approach I Random testing  generate random inputs  execute the program on generated inputs Probability of reaching an error can be astronomically less test_me(int x){ if(x==94389){ ERROR; } Probability of hitting ERROR = 1/2 32

7 Existing Approach II Symbolic Execution  use symbolic values for input variables  execute the program symbolically on symbolic input values  collect symbolic path constraints  use theorem prover to check if a branch can be taken Does not scale for large programs test_me(int x){ if((x%10)*4!=17){ ERROR; } else { ERROR; } Symbolic execution will say both branches are reachable: False positive

8 Approach Combine concrete and symbolic execution for unit testing  Concrete + Symbolic = Concolic In a nutshell  Use concrete execution over a concrete input to guide symbolic execution  Concrete execution helps Symbolic execution to simplify complex and unmanageable symbolic expressions by replacing symbolic values by concrete values Achieves Scalability  Higher branch coverage than random testing  No false positives or scalability issue like in symbolic execution based testing

9 Example typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Random Test Driver: random memory graph reachable from p random value for x Probability of reaching abort( ) is extremely low

10 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL

11 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL

12 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL

13 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL !(p 0 !=NULL )

14 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL p 0 =NULL solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL

15 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p=p 0, x=x 0 p, x=236 NULL p 0 =NULL solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL x 0 =236, p NULL

16 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634

17 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0

18 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL

19 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1  v 0

20 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1  v 0

21 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1  v 0 solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL and 2x 0 +1=v 0

22 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=236 NULL 634 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1  v 0 solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL and 2x 0 +1=v 0 x 0 =1, p 0 3 NULL

23 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3

24 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0

25 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL

26 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0

27 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 n0p0n0p0

28 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 n0p0n0p0

29 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL and 2x 0 +1=v 0 and n 0 =p 0. p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 n0p0n0p0

30 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints solve: x 0 >0 and p 0  NULL and 2x 0 +1=v 0 and n 0 =p 0 x 0 =1, p 0 3 p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 NULL 3 x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 n0p0n0p0

31 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 3

32 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 3

33 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p 0  NULL p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 3

34 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 3

35 CUTE Approach typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; } Concrete Execution Symbolic Execution concrete state symbolic state constraints x 0 >0 p 0  NULL 2x 0 +1=v 0 n0=p0n0=p0 p=p 0, x=x 0, p->v =v 0, p->next=n 0 p, x=1 3 Program Error

36 Pointer Inputs: Input Graph typedef struct cell { int v; struct cell *next; } cell; int f(int v) { return 2*v + 1; } int testme(cell *p, int x) { if (x > 0) if (p != NULL) if (f(x) == p->v) if (p->next == p) abort(); return 0; }

37 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

38 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

39 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

40 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

41 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

42 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

43 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

44 Explicit Path (not State) Model Checking Traverse all execution paths one by one to detect errors  check for assertion violations  check for program crash  combine with valgrind to discover memory leaks  detect invariants

45 CUTE in a Nutshell Generate concrete inputs one by one  each input leads program along a different path

46 CUTE in a Nutshell Generate concrete inputs one by one  each input leads program along a different path On each input execute program both concretely and symbolically

47 CUTE in a Nutshell Generate concrete inputs one by one  each input leads program along a different path On each input execute program both concretely and symbolically  Both cooperate with each other concrete execution guides the symbolic execution

48 CUTE in a Nutshell Generate concrete inputs one by one  each input leads program along a different path On each input execute program both concretely and symbolically  Both cooperate with each other concrete execution guides the symbolic execution concrete execution enables symbolic execution to overcome incompleteness of theorem prover  replace symbolic expressions by concrete values if symbolic expressions become complex  resolve aliases for pointer using concrete values  handle arrays naturally

49 CUTE in a Nutshell Generate concrete inputs one by one  each input leads program along a different path On each input execute program both concretely and symbolically  Both cooperate with each other concrete execution guides the symbolic execution concrete execution enables symbolic execution to overcome incompleteness of theorem prover  replace symbolic expressions by concrete values if symbolic expressions become complex  resolve aliases for pointer using concrete values  handle arrays naturally symbolic execution helps to generate concrete input for next execution  increases coverage

50 Testing Data-structures of CUTE itself Unit tested several non-standard data- structures implemented for the CUTE tool  cu_depend (used to determine dependency during constraint solving using graph algorithm)  cu_linear (linear symbolic expressions)  cu_pointer (pointer symbolic expressions) Discovered a few memory leaks and a couple of segmentation faults  these errors did not show up in other uses of CUTE  for memory leaks we used CUTE in conjunction with Valgrind

51 SGLIB: popular library for C data-structures Used in Xrefactory a commercial tool for refactoring C/C++ programs Found two bugs in sglib  reported them to authors  fixed in sglib Bug 1:  doubly-linked list library segmentation fault occurs when a non-zero length list is concatenated with a zero-length list discovered in 140 iterations ( < 1second) Bug 2:  hash-table an infinite loop in hash table is member function  193 iterations (1 second)

52 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver

53 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9 take then branch with constraint x*x*x+ 3*x*x+9 != y

54 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9 take then branch with constraint x*x*x+ 3*x*x+9 != y solve x*x*x+ 3*x*x+9 = y to take else branch Don’t know how to solve !!  Stuck ?

55 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9 take then branch with constraint x*x*x+ 3*x*x+9 != y solve x*x*x+ 3*x*x+9 = y to take else branch Don’t know how to solve !!  Stuck ?  NO : CUTE handles this smartly

56 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver

57 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9  cannot handle symbolic value of z

58 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9  cannot handle symbolic value of z  make symbolic z = 9 and proceed

59 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9  cannot handle symbolic value of z  make symbolic z = 9 and proceed take then branch with constraint 9 != y

60 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9  cannot handle symbolic value of z  make symbolic z = 9 and proceed take then branch with constraint 9 != y solve 9 = y to take else branch execute next run with x = -3 and y= 9  got error (reaches abort)

61 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } Let initially x = -3 and y = 7 generated by random test- driver concrete z = 9 symbolic z = x*x*x + 3*x*x+9  cannot handle symbolic value of z  make symbolic z = 9 and proceed take then branch with constraint 9 != y solve 9 = y to take else branch execute next run with x = -3 and y= 9  got error (reaches abort) Replace symbolic expression by concrete value when symbolic expression becomes unmanageable (i.e. non-linear)

62 Simultaneous Symbolic & Concrete Execution void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = x*x*x + 3*x*x + 9; if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); } void again_test_me(int x,int y){ z = black_box_fun(x); if(z != y){ printf(“Good branch”); } else { printf(“Bad branch”); abort(); }

63 Related Work “DART: Directed Automated Random Testing” by Patrice Godefroid, Nils Klarlund, and Koushik Sen (PLDI’05)  handles only arithmetic constraints CUTE  Supports C with pointers, data-structures  Highly efficient constraint solver times faster  arithmetic, pointers  Provides Bounded Depth-First Search and Random Search strategies  Publicly available tool that works on ALL C programs

64 Discussion CUTE is  light-weight  dynamic analysis (compare with static analysis) ensures no false alarms  concrete execution and symbolic execution run simultaneously symbolic execution consults concrete execution whenever dynamic analysis becomes intractable  real tool that works on all C programs completely automatic Requires actual code that can be fully compiled Can sometime reduce to Random Testing Complementary to Static Analysis Tools