Yannic Noller

Debugging software, i.e., the localization of faults and their repair, is a main activity in software engineering. Therefore, effective and efficient debugging is one of the core skills a software engineer must develop. However, the teaching of debugging techniques is usually very limited or only taught in indirect ways, e.g., during software projects. As a result, most Computer Science (CS) students learn debugging only in an ad-hoc and unstructured way. In this work, we present our approach called Simulated Interactive Debugging that interactively guides students along the debugging process. The guidance aims to empower the students to repair their solutions and have a proper "learning" experience. We envision that such guided debugging techniques can be integrated into programming courses early in the CS education curriculum. To perform an initial evaluation, we developed a prototypical implementation using traditional fault localization techniques and large language models. Students can use features like the automated setting of breakpoints or an interactive chatbot. We designed and executed a controlled experiment that included this IDE-integrated tooling with eight undergraduate CS students. Based on the responses, we conclude that the participants liked the systematic guidance by the assisted debugger. In particular, they rated the automated setting of breakpoints as the most effective, followed by the interactive debugging and chatting, and the explanations for how breakpoints were set. In our future work, we will improve our concept and implementation, add new features, and perform more intensive user studies.

Debugging is a fundamental skill that novice programmers must develop. Numerous tools have been created to assist novice programmers in this process. Recently, large language models (LLMs) have been integrated with automated program repair techniques to generate fixes for students’ buggy code. However, many of these tools foster an over-reliance on AI and do not actively engage students in the debugging process. In this work, we aim to design an intuitive debugging assistant, CodeHinter, that combines traditional debugging tools with LLM-based techniques to help novice debuggers fix semantic errors while promoting active engagement in the debugging process. We present findings from our second design iteration, which we tested with a group of undergraduate students. Our results indicate that the students found the tool highly effective in resolving semantic errors and significantly easier to use than the first version. Consistent with our previous study, error localization was the most valuable feature. Finally, we conclude that any AI-assisted debugging approach should be personalized based on user profiles to optimize their interactions with the tool.

Fuzzing has proven to be an effective tool for finding bugs in software, with Google’s OSSFuzz alone being responsible for finding thousands of critical security vulnerabilities in open source projects. As software development practices evolve, there is a growing recognition of the need to integrate security testing earlier in the development process. Yet in our survey of software practitioners, only 20% used fuzzing as part of their development workflow. In this paper, we explore how fuzzing can fit into the software development life cycle. We do so with two empirical studies, including perspectives from over 40 industry practitioners. First, in a survey of software professionals, we identify several gaps between current state-of-the-art fuzzers’ capabilities and engineers’ expectations. In particular, we find that most developers are willing to use fuzzers, but prefer shorter, more frequent fuzzing runs as part of a continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) workflow. Next, based on results of this survey, we assess state-of-the-art fuzzers’ capabilities in the context of CI/CD and local development workflows. We observe that existing fuzzers can find up to 50% of bugs within 5 minutes of fuzzing, meeting developer expectations from our survey, but that further research is needed to uncover more difficult bugs within tolerable time limits. Additionally, we see that the initial corpus and time needed to build and analyze a project for a particular fuzzer both have a significant effect on fuzzer effectiveness in this context. We hope that our work will help the community to drive wider adoption of fuzzing in the software development lifecycle.

Automated program repair is an emerging technology that seeks to automatically rectify bugs and vulnerabilities using learning, search, and semantic analysis. Trust in automatically generated patches is necessary for achieving greater adoption of program repair. Towards this goal, we survey more than 100 software practitioners to understand the artifacts and setups needed to enhance trust in automatically generated patches. Based on the feedback from the survey on developer preferences, we quantitatively evaluate existing test-suite based program repair tools. We find that they cannot produce high-quality patches within a top-10 ranking and an acceptable time period of 1 hour. The developer feedback from our qualitative study and the observations from our quantitative examination of existing repair tools point to actionable insights to drive program repair research. Specifically, we note that producing repairs within an acceptable time-bound is very much dependent on leveraging an abstract search space representation of a rich enough search space. Moreover, while additional developer inputs are valuable for generating or ranking patches, developers do not seem to be interested in a significant human-in-the-loop interaction.

Automated program repair reduces the manual effort in fixing program errors. However, existing repair techniques modify a buggy program such that it passes given tests. Such repair techniques do not discriminate between correct patches and patches that overfit the available tests (breaking untested but desired functionality). We propose an integrated approach for detecting and discarding overfitting patches via systematic co-exploration of the patch space and input space. We leverage concolic path exploration to systematically traverse the input space (and generate inputs), while ruling out significant parts of the patch space. Given a long enough time budget, this approach allows a significant reduction in the pool of patch candidates, as shown by our experiments. We implemented our technique in the form of a tool called ’CPR’ and evaluated its efficacy in reducing the patch space by discarding overfitting patches from a pool of plausible patches. We evaluated our approach for fixing real-world software vulnerabilities and defects, for fixing functionality errors in programs drawn from SV-COMP benchmarks used in software verification, as well as for test-suite guided repair. In our experiments, we observed a patch space reduction due to our concolic exploration of up to 74% for fixing software vulnerabilities and up to 63% for SV-COMP programs. Our technique presents the viewpoint of gradual correctness - repair run over longer time leads to less overfitting fixes.

Detecting regression bugs in software evolution, analyzing side-channels in programs and evaluating robustness in deep neural networks (DNNs) can all be seen as instances of differential software analysis, where the goal is to generate diverging executions of program paths. Two executions are said to be diverging if the observable program behavior differs, e.g., in terms of program output, execution time, or (DNN) classification. The key challenge of differential software analysis is to simultaneously reason about multiple program paths, often across program variants.This paper presents HyDiff, the first hybrid approach for differential software analysis. HyDiff integrates and extends two very successful testing techniques: Feedback-directed greybox fuzzing for efficient program testing and shadow symbolic execution for systematic program exploration. HyDiff extends greybox fuzzing with divergence-driven feedback based on novel cost metrics that also take into account the control flow graph of the program. Furthermore HyDiff extends shadow symbolic execution by applying four-way forking in a systematic exploration and still having the ability to incorporate concrete inputs in the analysis. HyDiff applies divergence revealing heuristics based on resource consumption and control-flow information to efficiently guide the symbolic exploration, which allows its efficient usage beyond regression testing applications. We introduce differential metrics such as output, decision and cost difference, as well as patch distance, to assist the fuzzing and symbolic execution components in maximizing the execution divergence.We implemented our approach on top of the fuzzer AFL and the symbolic execution framework Symbolic PathFinder. Weillustrate HyDiff on regression and side-channel analysis for Java bytecode programs, and further show how to use HyDiff for robustness analysis of neural networks.

Side-channel attacks allow an adversary to uncover secret program data by observing the behavior of a program with respect to a resource, such as execution time, consumed memory or response size. Side-channel vulnerabilities are difficult to reason about as they involve analyzing the correlations between resource usage over multiple program paths. We present DifFuzz, a fuzzing-based approach for detecting side-channel vulnerabilities related to time and space. DifFuzz automatically detects these vulnerabilities by analyzing two versions of the program and using resource-guided heuristics to find inputs that maximize the difference in resource consumption between secret-dependent paths. The methodology of DifFuzz is general and can be applied to programs written in any language. For this paper, we present an implementation that targets analysis of Java programs, and uses and extends the Kelinci and AFL fuzzers. We evaluate DifFuzz on a large number of Java programs and demonstrate that it can reveal unknown side-channel vulnerabilities in popular applications. We also show that DifFuzz compares favorably against Blazer and Themis, two state-of-the-art analysis tools for finding side-channels in Java programs.