Automotive Fuzz Testing

Some bugs only show up when you feed a system inputs it never expected. That's exactly what fuzz.core does, at scale, surfacing crashes, memory leaks and undefined behaviour in your embedded systems before they reach production.

The Bugs Manual Testing Misses

Manual review and scripted tests check the cases you thought of. Fuzzing checks the millions you didn't: malformed messages, edge-case timings, sequences nobody planned for, the kind of inputs an attacker, or a fault out in the field, will eventually produce.

And in safety-relevant automotive systems, an unhandled crash isn't only a security problem. It can be a reliability and safety one too. Fuzzing finds those failure modes while they're still cheap to fix.

What We Fuzz

In-vehicle protocols

CAN/CAN-FD, UDS and DoIP, fuzzed at the protocol level. We push malformed frames and unexpected message sequences at the bus to find the states an ECU was never written to handle.

Wireless interfaces

Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and cellular stacks, exercised the way a nearby attacker would reach them. These are the interfaces that are live without anyone touching the vehicle, so they earn the deepest campaigns.

File & message parsers

Update packages, media files and V2X messages, all of which are parsed from data the vehicle did not create. Parsers are where malformed input turns into memory corruption, so we fuzz them hard.

APIs & backends

Telematics and cloud endpoints, fuzzed at the request and payload level. The backend is part of the vehicle's attack surface, so it gets the same treatment as anything on the bus.

fuzz.core

fuzz.core powers it all: automated fuzzing, intelligent input mutation, coverage analysis to reach deep code paths, and crash detection with triage, so you fix what matters first.

fuzz.core

What You Get

Reproducible crash cases

You get reproducible crash cases, coverage metrics, root-cause indicators and remediation guidance, plus evidence you can fold straight into your ISO/SAE 21434 and UN R155/R156 work.

Deliverables

A prioritised crash report · reproducible test cases · coverage analysis · remediation guidance.

Common Questions

Crashes, memory corruption, hangs and undefined behaviour triggered by malformed or unexpected inputs, the kind of issues that are both security and reliability risks.
Mostly, yes. fuzz.core automates the input mutation and execution, using coverage analysis to reach deeper code paths, while our engineers triage and root-cause what it finds.
In-vehicle protocols (CAN, UDS, DoIP), wireless stacks, parsers, and backend APIs.
They find different classes of issue, so yes, most thorough programmes use both. Pen testing chases goal-driven exploitation, while fuzzing surfaces input-handling and memory faults.

Put Your Embedded Code Under Pressure

Book a session and we'll fuzz the interfaces that matter most for your product, then hand back reproducible, prioritised findings you can act on.