Remove the Eclipser fuzzing documentation from doc/fuzzing.md, as that repository (https://github.com/SoftSec-KAIST/Eclipser) hasn’t been updated in several years, appears possibly unmaintained, and likely isn’t being actively used for fuzzing Bitcoin Core.
These docs were originally added in #22585.
The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.
For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.
See the guideline for information on the review process.
If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.
I think we could even remove eclipser from the docs entirely. As you noted as well, it looks unmaintained and I don’t think any of us are actively using it.
That being said it would be nice to have an example of a maintained concolic testing tool in the docs (e.g. https://github.com/eurecom-s3/symqemu) but that could be done as a follow up.
That being said it would be nice to have an example of a maintained concolic testing tool in the docs (e.g. https://github.com/eurecom-s3/symqemu) but that could be done as a follow up.
Agree. Also, it would be nice to (at the same time) add a synthetic bug (or prior real bug) that shows how the tool works and shows that (in this specific instance at least) it provides real value over just afl+libFuzzer+honggfuzz, using a saturated or at least well-developed corpus based on the existing developed qa-assets corpus.
I think we could even remove eclipser from the docs entirely. As you noted as well, it looks unmaintained and I don’t think any of us are actively using it.
Agreed.
[skip ci]
I think we could even remove eclipser from the docs entirely. As you noted as well, it looks unmaintained and I don’t think any of us are actively using it.
Done, thanks everyone for the feedback. Leaving for a follow-up the addition of a concolic testing tool example with bug.