You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Enhance Security and provide Alerts with OSS-Fuzz for Continuous Fuzz Testing #1267
Hii Team
I’d like to propose integrating grass-addons with OSS-Fuzz continuous fuzz testing platform designed to improve the stability and security of open-source projects.
Why Integrate grass-addons with OSS-Fuzz?
Improved Stability: OSS-Fuzz can automatically detect edge-case bugs, crashes, and security vulnerabilities in grass-addons codebase.
Enhanced Reliability: Continuous fuzzing ensures that untrusted inputs, such as data from sensors, communication protocols, or user-defined configurations, are handled robustly.
Proactive Bug Fixes: By identifying potential issues early, OSS-Fuzz helps maintain a stable and secure codebase.
I imagine fuzzing would ultimately be more useful for C library code that parses user input for example. Addons that only process by calling other functions might be harder to evaluate.
Hii
Thanks For your Response
I will Create Initial Integration as Just like GDAL has been integrated
So for this Can I just get the email of maintainer to add at .yaml file and other contributors ?
I will be starting initial integration at oss fuzz but to ensure the development of effective fuzz targets, I seek your guidance on the following:
What function should I have been tested in fuzz_target file for grass-addons
Critical Functions: Could you identify specific functions or modules within the addons that would benefit most from fuzz testing?
Existing Tests: Are there existing unit tests or test cases that could serve as a foundation for creating fuzz targets?
Or Else Could Team Create Fuzz_Target file code ?
Activity
neteler commentedon Dec 16, 2024
To have OSS-Fuzz for GRASS GIS (addons) might be a relevant addition. GDAL already uses it for a while, see blog article and stats at introspector.
I would suggest implementing a fuzz test for a single addon, as a proof of concept.
echoix commentedon Dec 16, 2024
I imagine fuzzing would ultimately be more useful for C library code that parses user input for example. Addons that only process by calling other functions might be harder to evaluate.
Shivam7-1 commentedon Dec 16, 2024
Hii
Thanks For your Response
I will Create Initial Integration as Just like GDAL has been integrated
So for this Can I just get the email of maintainer to add at .yaml file and other contributors ?
Thanks
Shivam7-1 commentedon Dec 17, 2024
Hii Team
I will be starting initial integration at oss fuzz but to ensure the development of effective fuzz targets, I seek your guidance on the following:
What function should I have been tested in fuzz_target file for grass-addons
Critical Functions: Could you identify specific functions or modules within the addons that would benefit most from fuzz testing?
Existing Tests: Are there existing unit tests or test cases that could serve as a foundation for creating fuzz targets?
Or Else Could Team Create Fuzz_Target file code ?