similar to: [LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer only for Linux

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 300 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer only for Linux"

2015 Jul 08
2
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer only for Linux
FWIW see also http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-June/043301.html As far as I understand DFSan functionality isn't required for libFuzzer to work, so it should be safe to disable DFSan support on Mac. On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 7:45 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > +pcc , glider > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Juan Ceasar <juan.d.ceasar at
2015 Jul 04
2
[LLVMdev] libFuzzer newbie question
So I was curious to start using the libFuzzer, but trying to follow along I got the following error: clang++ -fsanitize=address -fsanitize-coverage=edge test_fuzzer.cc Fuzzer*.o Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64: "_dfsan_create_label", referenced from: fuzzer::TraceState::DFSanCmpCallback(unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long long, unsigned long
2015 Jul 10
2
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer only for Linux
Kostya, I took a quick stab at patching libFuzzer for Apple, but so far I'm thinking something else is incorrect. Patch is attached but when I went to reproduce the examples, the toy example went fine, but with PCRE and Heartbleed I noticed the coverage statistics were pretty poor, and didn't find anything. Admittedly I moved onto Heartbleed pretty quickly so PCRE probably isn't the
2015 Sep 10
2
LibFuzzer and platforms availability
r247321 refactors the code so that it should build on Mac. I haven't actually tested it on Mac -- so please help me and send follow up patches if needed. check-fuzzer will still fail because some of the libFuzzer tests require dfsan. I'd use some help from someone with a Mac to modify lib/Fuzzer/test/CMakeLists.txt so that it does not run dfsan-dependent tests on Mac. Thanks, --kcc On
2015 Sep 09
3
LibFuzzer and platforms availability
Hi there. I’m trying to use LibFuzzer on OSX and face some issues: I checked out LibFuzzer documentation[1] and managed to proceed until the final step of the first example. Now I see linker errors related to dfsan, dfsan’s documentation[2] states explicitly “DataFlowSanitizer is a work in progress, currently under development for x86_64 Linux.”. Does it mean that LibFuzzer available only on
2019 Apr 16
2
"compiler-rt" - DataFlowSanitizer
Hi all, I have some questions about "DataFlowSanitizer" from "compiler-rt". I want to know how I can test the "DataFlowSanitizer"? Can I configure it to label only some values, i.e, the return values from specific functions? Also, how can I print these labels? Thanks, Dareen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2015 Jan 15
2
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer using wrong memory layout
Hi all, Any one tried using DataFlowSanitizer on Linux x86_64? I tried on: 3.13.0-44-generic #73~precise1-Ubuntu SMP Wed Dec 17 00:39:15 UTC 2014 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux It assumes wrong memory layout and remaps application code segment as shadow memory, thus causing SIGSEV (Segmentation fault). Is this know? and fix under way? -Thanks, Aravind -------------- next part
2019 Jul 06
2
Seeking suggestions about interfacing of LLVM DataFlowSanitizer library with KLEE in C code.
Dear Developers, I am a Master's student at the ECE department of the University of Florida, USA.​​ For my research project, supervised by Prof. Mark Tehranipoor<http://tehranipoor.ece.ufl.edu/> and Prof. Farimah Farahmandi<http://farimah.ece.ufl.edu/>, I need to use Clang LLVM DataflowSanitizer library in KLEE. However, I have faced some difficulties (explained below) while
2017 Jun 15
2
Linker error while linking DataFlowSanitizer to LLVM IR
I am using pre-built LLVM/Clang 3.8.0 binaries on Ubuntu 16.04.2, 64 bit. I tried to lift a minimal program to LLVM IR, then link the IR to DataFlowSanitizer libraries to produce executable code. In the second step, the process throws a bunch of linker errors. ========================================= #include <sanitizer/dfsan_interface.h> #include <assert.h> int main(void) { int
2018 Mar 31
1
using llvm DataFlowSanitizer error
Hi. I'm using llvm DataFlowSanitizer. I add such code in library libtiff. dfsan_label lt_label = dfsan_create_label("buf_offset", 0); dfsan_set_label(lt_label, (unsigned char *)buf, size); But when i compile libtiff with "-fsanitize=dataflow" option, then there is an error as follows: ../libtiff/libtiff.so.5.2.5: undefined reference to `dfs$jbg_enc_init'
2013 Jun 26
0
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote: > Hi, > > I am starting a thread to discuss the design of DataFlowSanitizer, > a compiler instrumentation based analysis tool which I am hoping to > bring into LLVM. As a starting point, I have included the current > version of the design document below. Comments are appreciated. Any further comments on the
2013 Jun 13
5
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
Hi, I am starting a thread to discuss the design of DataFlowSanitizer, a compiler instrumentation based analysis tool which I am hoping to bring into LLVM. As a starting point, I have included the current version of the design document below. Comments are appreciated. Thanks, Peter DataFlowSanitizer Design Document ********************************* This document sets out the design for
2013 Aug 07
0
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Peter Collingbourne <peter at pcc.me.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > If there are no further comments on the design below I intend to commit > my DFSan patches in a week. > I think it would be good to get Kostya's explicit sign-off on this before committing it, as he has been directing and overseeing the sanitizer work as a whole over the past year.
2013 Aug 07
1
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
15.06.2013, 00:53, "Bin Tzeng" <bintzeng at gmail.com>: > It is interesting. I can see some use cases with such a tool. To me, source-level implementation > is not as accurate as binary translation. For instance, it is hard to check the taint for return addresses > since there is no concept of return instructions on source level. Well, on many architectures there is no
2018 Apr 01
0
using llvm DataFlowSanitizer error
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 8:50 AM, 吕涛 via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi. I'm using llvm DataFlowSanitizer. I add such code in library libtiff. > > dfsan_label lt_label = dfsan_create_label("buf_offset", 0); > > dfsan_set_label(lt_label, (unsigned char *)buf, size); > > But when i compile libtiff with "-fsanitize=dataflow" option,
2013 Jun 13
0
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
Could you maybe give some example use cases? Also, "sanitizer" may not be the best name for this, since it doesn't really sanitize anything. -- Sean Silva -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20130613/89f3df75/attachment.html>
2006 Aug 10
2
dovecot process dies
Hi to all. I upgraded my dovecot from rc5 to rc6. Prior to upgrading, it was working seamlessly. But now I couldn't start dovecot. Here's what the log says: Aug 10 10:39:17 proxy dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.rc6 starting up Aug 10 10:39:18 proxy dovecot: Login process died too early - shutting down Aug 10 10:39:18 proxy dovecot: child 29033 (login) killed with signal 11 Aug 10 10:39:18 proxy
2013 Aug 07
2
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
Hi, If there are no further comments on the design below I intend to commit my DFSan patches in a week. Thanks, Peter On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 06:13:49PM -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote: > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 03:00:46PM -0700, Peter Collingbourne wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am starting a thread to discuss the design of DataFlowSanitizer, > > a compiler
2013 Jun 14
0
[LLVMdev] DataFlowSanitizer design discussion
It is interesting. I can see some use cases with such a tool. To me, source-level implementation is not as accurate as binary translation. For instance, it is hard to check the taint for return addresses since there is no concept of return instructions on source level. The stack does not appear until later. For a security mechanism, return addresses need to be protected. On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at
2017 Mar 10
2
OCaml bindings
Hi All, I’m being a complete newbie on this one but how do I generate the OCaml bindings? I saw an old google post using “configure —enable-bindings=ocaml” but we don’t use configure anymore (I’m building 3.9.1) and if I just do a regular build (optimized) then I don’t see any bindings in my build directory…. Any ideas? JC