MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125982494 · doi:10.1109/ase63991.2025.00211

DRIFT: Debug-based Trace Inference for Firmware Testing

2025· article· W7125982494 on OpenAlexaff
Changming Liu, Alejandro Mera, Meng Xu, Engin Kirda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirmwareFuzz testingDebuggingConcept driftBinary numberSource codeTRACE (psycholinguistics)Interrupt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Binary firmware fuzzing has garnered attention in recent years. Compared to source-code-based approaches, binary approaches require less semantic information and are therefore more applicable. This is particularly relevant in firmware analysis, as most firmware vendors distribute only binaries, withholding source code due to proprietary concerns.Pivoting away from the traditional hardware-in-the-loop (HiL) methodology, researchers are exploring more efficient ways to engage real hardware for fuzzing. However, existing approaches have inherent drawbacks, such as reliance on high-end hardware features, inability to recover complete coverage, and slow execution speeds. We propose DRIFT, a novel approach for on-device binary firmware testing that follows the semihosting methodology. DRIFT addresses all the aforementioned drawbacks. The core insight of DRIFT is to use the Debug Monitor (DM) for firmware fuzzing. DM is a Arm Cortex-M CPU feature that allows triggering interrupt when a breakpoint is hit. Through chaining the DM interrupts, DRIFT is able let firmware to trace itself. This self-tracing approach minimizes interference from the workstation, significantly boosting fuzzing performance.We designed DRIFT to be highly flexible, accommodating a number of hardware resource limitations. When applied to new firmware, DRIFT discovered three previously unknown bugs that were not identified by existing binary fuzzing techniques. Furthermore, DRIFT outperforms all state-of-the-art binary firmware fuzzers in terms of speed and fidelity, trailing only SHiFT, an approach that requires source code.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207