Ruijie Meng (National University of Singapore, Singapore), Martin Mirchev (National University of Singapore), Marcel Böhme (MPI-SP, Germany and Monash University, Australia), Abhik Roychoudhury (National University of Singapore)

How to find security flaws in a protocol implementation without a machine-readable specification of the protocol? Facing the internet, protocol implementations are particularly security-critical software systems where inputs must adhere to a specific structure and order that is often informally specified in hundreds of pages in natural language (RFC). Without some machine-readable version of that protocol, it is difficult to automatically generate valid test inputs for its implementation that follow the required structure and order. It is possible to partially alleviate this challenge using mutational fuzzing on a set of recorded message sequences as seed inputs. However, the set of available seeds is often quite limited and will hardly cover the great diversity of protocol states and input structures.

In this paper, we explore the opportunities of systematic interaction with a pre-trained large language models (LLM) which has ingested millions of pages of human-readable protocol specifications, to draw out machine-readable information about the protocol that can be used during protocol fuzzing. We use the knowledge of the LLMs about protocol message types for well-known protocols. We also checked the LLM's capability in detecting ``states" for stateful protocol implementations by generating sequences of messages and predicting response codes. Based on these observations, we have developed an LLM-guided protocol implementation fuzzing engine. Our protocol fuzzer ChatAFL constructs grammars for each message type in a protocol, and then mutates messages or predicts the next messages in a message sequence via interactions with LLMs. Experiments on a wide range of real-world protocols from ProFuzzbench show significant efficacy in state and code coverage. Our LLM-guided stateful fuzzer was compared with state-of-the-art fuzzers AFLNet and NSFuzz. ChatAFL covers 47.6% and 42.7% more state transitions, 29.6% and 25.8% more states, and 5.8% and 6.7% more code, respectively. Apart from enhanced coverage, ChatAFL discovered nine distinct and previously unknown vulnerabilities in widely-used and extensively-tested protocol implementations while AFLNet and NSFuzz only discover three and four of them, respectively.

View More Papers

FirmDiff: Improving the Configuration of Linux Kernels Geared Towards...

Ioannis Angelakopoulos (Boston University), Gianluca Stringhini (Boston University), Manuel Egele (Boston University)

Read More

PrintListener: Uncovering the Vulnerability of Fingerprint Authentication via the...

Man Zhou (Huazhong University of Science and Technology), Shuao Su (Huazhong University of Science and Technology), Qian Wang (Wuhan University), Qi Li (Tsinghua University), Yuting Zhou (Huazhong University of Science and Technology), Xiaojing Ma (Huazhong University of Science and Technology), Zhengxiong Li (University of Colorado Denver)

Read More

Threats Against Satellite Ground Infrastructure: A retrospective analysis of...

Jessie Hamill-Stewart (University of Bristol and University of Bath), Awais Rashid (University of Bristol)

Read More

UniID: Spoofing Face Authentication System by Universal Identity

Zhihao Wu (Zhejiang University), Yushi Cheng (Zhejiang University), Shibo Zhang (Zhejiang University), Xiaoyu Ji (Zhejiang University), Wenyuan Xu (Zhejing University)

Read More