Synergistic Integration of Blockchain and Software-Defined Networking in the Internet of Energy Systems
Authors:
Vahideh Hayyolalam,
Abdulrezzak Zekiye,
Hamza Abuzahra,
Oznur Ozkasap,
Murat Karakus,
Evrim Guler,
Suleyman Uludag
Abstract:
Peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading, Smart Grids (SG), and electric vehicle energy management are integral components of the Internet of Energy (IoE) field. The integration of Software-Defined Networks (SDNs) and Blockchain (BC) technologies into the IoE domain offers potential benefits that have only been studied in the literature in a few works. In this paper, we investigate the state-of-art solut…
▽ More
Peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading, Smart Grids (SG), and electric vehicle energy management are integral components of the Internet of Energy (IoE) field. The integration of Software-Defined Networks (SDNs) and Blockchain (BC) technologies into the IoE domain offers potential benefits that have only been studied in the literature in a few works. In this paper, we investigate the state-of-art solutions that leverage both SDNs and blockchain within the realm of the IoE. We categorize these solutions based on the method of integrating SDN and BC into two categories. The first category is the blockchain for SDN, where blockchain enhances the SDN directly. The second category is blockchain and SDN, where both technologies are used to enhance the proposed solutions. We identify three distinct blockchain applications based on their usage: decentralizing the SDN control plane, serving as a decentralized platform, and improving security measures. Similarly, we observe that SDN serves as a performance enhancer, a substitute for traditional networking, and solely as a control and management framework. It is posited that integrating SDNs and blockchain into IoE leads to performance enhancements, improves security, enables decentralized operations, and eliminates single points of failure in the SDN control plane. Additionally, some unaddressed issues, such as energy efficiency, smart contract management, and scalability, are discussed as potential future directions.
△ Less
Submitted 23 December, 2024;
originally announced December 2024.
Systematic Assessment of Fuzzers using Mutation Analysis
Authors:
Philipp Görz,
Björn Mathis,
Keno Hassler,
Emre Güler,
Thorsten Holz,
Andreas Zeller,
Rahul Gopinath
Abstract:
Fuzzing is an important method to discover vulnerabilities in programs. Despite considerable progress in this area in the past years, measuring and comparing the effectiveness of fuzzers is still an open research question. In software testing, the gold standard for evaluating test quality is mutation analysis, which evaluates a test's ability to detect synthetic bugs: If a set of tests fails to de…
▽ More
Fuzzing is an important method to discover vulnerabilities in programs. Despite considerable progress in this area in the past years, measuring and comparing the effectiveness of fuzzers is still an open research question. In software testing, the gold standard for evaluating test quality is mutation analysis, which evaluates a test's ability to detect synthetic bugs: If a set of tests fails to detect such mutations, it is expected to also fail to detect real bugs. Mutation analysis subsumes various coverage measures and provides a large and diverse set of faults that can be arbitrarily hard to trigger and detect, thus preventing the problems of saturation and overfitting. Unfortunately, the cost of traditional mutation analysis is exorbitant for fuzzing, as mutations need independent evaluation.
In this paper, we apply modern mutation analysis techniques that pool multiple mutations and allow us -- for the first time -- to evaluate and compare fuzzers with mutation analysis. We introduce an evaluation bench for fuzzers and apply it to a number of popular fuzzers and subjects. In a comprehensive evaluation, we show how we can use it to assess fuzzer performance and measure the impact of improved techniques. The required CPU time remains manageable: 4.09 CPU years are needed to analyze a fuzzer on seven subjects and a total of 141,278 mutations. We find that today's fuzzers can detect only a small percentage of mutations, which should be seen as a challenge for future research -- notably in improving (1) detecting failures beyond generic crashes (2) triggering mutations (and thus faults).
△ Less
Submitted 25 July, 2023; v1 submitted 6 December, 2022;
originally announced December 2022.
