Dissecting american fuzzy lop - A FuzzBench evaluation

AFL is one of the most used and extended fuzzer, adopted by industry and academic researchers alike. While the community agrees on AFL’s effectiveness at discovering new vulnerabilities and at its outstanding usability, many of its internal design choices remain untested to date. Security practitioners often clone the project “as-is” and use it as a starting point to develop new techniques, usually taking everything under the hood for granted. Instead, we believe that a careful analysis of the different parameters could help modern fuzzers to improve their performance and explain how each choice can affect the outcome of security testing, either negatively or positively. The goal of this paper is to provide a comprehensive understanding of the internal mechanisms of AFL by performing experiments and by comparing different metrics used to evaluate fuzzers. This can help to show the effectiveness of some techniques and to clarify which aspects are instead outdated. To perform our study we performed nine unique experiments that we carried out on the popular Fuzzbench platform. Each test focuses on a different aspect of AFL, ranging from its mutation approach to the feedback encoding scheme and its scheduling methodologies. Our findings show that each design choice affects different factors of AFL. While some of these are positively correlated with the number of detected bugs or the coverage of the target application, other features are instead related to usability and reliability. Most important, we believe that the outcome of our experiments indicates which parts of AFL we should preserve in the design of modern fuzzers.