-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 284
sfuzz #1880
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
sfuzz #1880
Conversation
Can you tell us a little about sfuzz and yourself? |
I am a security researcher and I had a PR before, but it is possible that I accidentally closed and deleted it. I have modified the energy scheduling algorithm, so I want to test its effectiveness. |
@jonathanmetzman Is there any problem? If not, can you run the experiment? Thank you. |
I was curious what this changes :) this change only affects the RARE schedule, a schedule that is great to add in a fuzzing campaign, but is outperformed here on fuzzbench by fast and explore easily:
this will make a too small difference to be visible in the results:
|
Yep, I made minor modifications and would like to see the effect of this modification. In the future, i will make improvements based on the benchmark. |
There was an error in cloud build, it has been fixed now. |
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2023-08-04-sfuzz --fuzzers sfuzz |
BTW, you don't have to add experiment requests to service/experiment-requests.yaml anymore, as we are running experiments from this PR with I did not include the core fuzzers in the command, because FB can use their statistics from their previous experiments. |
/gcbrun run_experiment.py -a --experiment-config /opt/fuzzbench/service/experiment-config.yaml --experiment-name 2023-08-04-sfuzz --fuzzers sfuzz |
I am pretty sure the experiment is running, despite that the CI says it failed. Experiment data and results will be available later at: |
@alan32liu Hi, I browsed the experimental data and found that it does not include woff2_convert_woff2ttf_fuzzer, but the generated report contains its comparison. Could you please remove this experimental comparison (woff2_convert_woff2ttf_fuzzer) and generate a new report? |
Hi @zerokay, the report can be regenerated based on this guide : ) The root cause of the missing experiment result of If you'd like to re-run |
Please re-run sfuzz on the benchmark, thanks. |
Sure, let's do that after my fix is merged. |
@alan32liu Hi,is it okay now? If not, could you remove the experiment and generate a new report? |
It's not ready yet, we are looking into the root case of the bug. |
Okay, I'll generate the report locally first. And I want to know all the experimental results, so please re-run sfuzz on the benchmark after fixing the error, thank you. |
@alan32liu Hi, is it okay now? If not, could you run the whole experiment again? |
I did not have the chance to close that PR due to my limited time working on this.
Re-running the experiment will not give us any new results without fixing the bug. |
compare against core fuzzers