tests: Add fuzzing harness for CheckTransaction(…), IsStandardTx(…) and other CTransaction related functions #17076

1. 
   practicalswift commented at 1:28 pm on October 8, 2019: contributor

   Add fuzzing harness for CheckTransaction(...), IsStandardTx(...) and other CTransaction related functions.

   Testing this PR

   Run:

   0$ CC=clang CXX=clang++ ./configure --enable-fuzz --with-sanitizers=address,fuzzer,undefined
   1$ make
   2$ src/test/fuzz/transaction
   3…
   4# And to to quickly verify that the relevant code regions are triggered, that the
   5# fuzzing throughput seems reasonable, etc.
   6$ contrib/devtools/test_fuzzing_harnesses.sh '^transaction$'
   

   test_fuzzing_harnesses.sh can be found in PR #17000.

2. fanquake added the label Tests on Oct 8, 2019
3. 
   DrahtBot commented at 2:05 pm on October 8, 2019: member

   The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

   Conflicts

   Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

   • #17093 (tests: Add fuzzing harness for various CTx{In,Out} related functions by practicalswift)
   • #17083 (tests: Add fuzzing harness for various CScript related functions by practicalswift)
   • #17071 (tests: Add fuzzing harness for CheckBlock(…) and other CBlock related functions by practicalswift)
   • #17051 (tests: Add deserialization fuzzing harnesses by practicalswift)
   • #17050 (tests: Add fuzzing harnesses for functions parsing scripts, numbers, JSON and HD keypaths (bip32) by practicalswift)
   • #17018 (tests: Add Parse(…) (descriptor) fuzzing harness by practicalswift)
   • #17009 (tests: Add EvalScript(…) fuzzing harness by practicalswift)

   If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

4. in src/test/fuzz/transaction.cpp:38 in 72db5d2392 outdated

   31+    }
   32+    const CTransaction tx = [&] {
   33+        try {
   34+            return CTransaction(deserialize, ds);
   35+        } catch (const std::ios_base::failure& e) {
   36+            return CTransaction();
   

   ---

   ---

   

   MarcoFalke commented at 6:03 pm on October 8, 2019:

   why not return early here. Seems wasteful to map all deserialization failures to an default constructed tx and then run all the checks with that.

   Also, TRANSACTION_DESERIALIZE can be removed from the existing fuzzer now, as the new fuzz test includes this dumb code path now?

   ---

   

   practicalswift commented at 9:00 pm on October 8, 2019:

   Good points. Feedback addressed. Please re-review :)
5. practicalswift force-pushed on Oct 8, 2019
6. in test/fuzz/test_runner.py:17 in fad17fc3a1 outdated

   11@@ -12,6 +12,10 @@
   12 import subprocess
   13 import logging
   14 
   15+# Fuzzers known to lack a seed corpus in https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets/tree/master/fuzz_seed_corpus
   16+FUZZERS_MISSING_CORPORA = [
   17+    "transaction",
   

   ---

   ---

   

   MarcoFalke commented at 9:03 pm on October 8, 2019:

   Can remove all of this?

   ---

   

   practicalswift commented at 1:54 pm on October 9, 2019:

   Fixed!
7. tests: Add fuzzing harness for CheckTransaction(...), IsStandardTx(...) and other CTransaction related functions 0a573682f2
8. tests: Remove TRANSACTION_DESERIALIZE (replaced by transaction fuzzer) 5c2987636f
9. in src/Makefile.test.include:319 in fad17fc3a1 outdated

   314@@ -321,6 +315,12 @@ test_fuzz_blocktransactionsrequest_deserialize_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) $(BITCO
   315 test_fuzz_blocktransactionsrequest_deserialize_CXXFLAGS = $(AM_CXXFLAGS) $(PIE_FLAGS)
   316 test_fuzz_blocktransactionsrequest_deserialize_LDFLAGS = $(RELDFLAGS) $(AM_LDFLAGS) $(LIBTOOL_APP_LDFLAGS)
   317 test_fuzz_blocktransactionsrequest_deserialize_LDADD = $(FUZZ_SUITE_LD_COMMON)
   318+test_fuzz_transaction_SOURCES = $(FUZZ_SUITE) test/fuzz/transaction.cpp
   

   ---

   ---

   

   MarcoFalke commented at 1:47 pm on October 9, 2019:

   style-nit: new line?

   ---

   

   practicalswift commented at 1:54 pm on October 9, 2019:

   Fixed!
10. practicalswift force-pushed on Oct 9, 2019
11. 
    MarcoFalke commented at 2:11 pm on October 9, 2019: member

    ACK 5c2987636faa5bc175b37b81fd98ab48e576da0b
12. MarcoFalke referenced this in commit 2352aec9fc on Oct 10, 2019
13. MarcoFalke merged this on Oct 10, 2019
14. MarcoFalke closed this on Oct 10, 2019

    ---

15. jasonbcox referenced this in commit 9e0128d086 on Jul 1, 2020
16. practicalswift deleted the branch on Apr 10, 2021
17. random-zebra referenced this in commit 44b5327e61 on May 28, 2021
18. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit 14c9dfae5d on Aug 2, 2021
19. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit 54c67774ea on Aug 5, 2021
20. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit 1fc41b57c6 on Aug 5, 2021
21. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit 00bd32844f on Aug 5, 2021
22. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 515640b35f on Aug 6, 2021
23. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit af0ec26170 on Aug 8, 2021
24. kittywhiskers referenced this in commit 19b94c6dfa on Aug 11, 2021
25. PastaPastaPasta referenced this in commit 90e7119a8b on Aug 11, 2021
26. 5tefan referenced this in commit fdb3ad7532 on Aug 12, 2021
27. gades referenced this in commit de468fed94 on May 6, 2022
28. DrahtBot locked this on Aug 18, 2022

Contributors
practicalswift DrahtBot MarcoFalke

Labels
Tests