OSS-fuzz needs some love

Andrew Bartlett abartlet at samba.org
Fri Sep 3 19:49:51 UTC 2021

On Fri, 2021-09-03 at 22:11 +0300, Uri Simchoni wrote:
> With the attached obvious patch, the oss-fuzz build succeeds on
> their 
> stock image. Haven't actually *ran* the fuzzer binaries though.

If you could run some of the check_build steps that would be awesome. 


> What do you suppose I should do on the oss-fuzz side? Do I just issue
> a 
> pull request, or do I have to be listed somewhere?

A pull request is all they need, you will have to do a CLA.  Do that
once you get your change in master via the normal process.

> Regarding drop of 16.04 build, we don't seem to have one in CI, so I
> can 
> just remove the old Python exception. Do note however that oss-fuzz 
> builds with clang, so we might want to have an Ubuntu 20.04+clang CI
> job 
> to ensure that build doesn't fail when it gets to oss-fuzz.

See the samba-fuzz target in .gitlab-ci-main.yml.  That needs to match
your change in what you attached.  

In terms of the clang thing, as a second step we could change that
target to more closely match oss-fuzz now it has a modern base.

Thanks so much!

Andrew Bartlett

> I hope that helps,
> Uri.
> On 9/1/21 11:10 PM, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical wrote:
> > Looks like work needs to be done to confirm we build in oss-fuzz
> > mode
> > on 20.04, upgrade the Dockerfile on their side to say so, then on
> > our
> > side drop the 16.04 build (and the old python exception for the
> > fuzzing
> > case in buildtools/wafsamba/samba_python.py).
> > 
> > Andrew Bartlett
> > 
Andrew Bartlett (he/him)       https://samba.org/~abartlet/
Samba Team Member (since 2001) https://samba.org
Samba Team Lead, Catalyst IT   https://catalyst.net.nz/services/samba

Samba Development and Support, Catalyst IT - Expert Open Source

More information about the samba-technical mailing list