Papers › Fuzzing BusyBox: Leveraging LLM and Crash Reuse for Embedded Bug Unearthing
Fuzzing BusyBox: Leveraging LLM and Crash Reuse for Embedded Bug Unearthing
Asmita, Yaroslav Oliinyk, Michael Scott, Ryan Tsang, Chongzhou Fang, Houman Homayoun
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
BusyBox, an open-source software bundling over 300 essential Linux commands into a single executable, is ubiquitous in Linux-based embedded devices. Vulnerabilities in BusyBox can have far-reaching consequences, affecting a wide array of devices. This research, driven by the extensive use of BusyBox, delved into its analysis. The study revealed the prevalence of older BusyBox versions in real-world embedded products, prompting us to conduct fuzz testing on BusyBox. Fuzzing, a pivotal software testing method, aims to induce crashes that are subsequently scrutinized to uncover vulnerabilities. Within this study, we introduce two techniques to fortify software testing. The first technique enhances fuzzing by leveraging Large Language Models (LLM) to generate target-specific initial seeds. Our study showed a substantial increase in crashes when using LLM-generated initial seeds, highlighting the potential of LLM to efficiently tackle the typically labor-intensive task of generating target-specific initial seeds. The second technique involves repurposing previously acquired crash data from similar fuzzed targets before initiating fuzzing on a new target. This approach streamlines the time-consuming fuzz testing process by providing crash data directly to the new target before commencing fuzzing. We successfully identified crashes in the latest BusyBox target without conducting traditional fuzzing, emphasizing the effectiveness of LLM and crash reuse techniques in enhancing software testing and improving vulnerability detection in embedded systems. Additionally, manual triaging was performed to identify the nature of crashes in the latest BusyBox.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2403.03897")
Code
Syntology Ran 1 of 3 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 1 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: official repository: 3 samples from 1 repository, 1 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
3 samples harvested; 1 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 3 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from asmitaj08/fuzzingbusybox_llm. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
625c03498280b99f · report
8855349595077aed · report
1bb0fa379e033856 · report
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections