<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/App_Themes/default/rss.xslt"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:evnet="http://www.mscommunities.com/rssmodule/"><channel><title>Comment Feed for Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE (Peli on Channel 9)</title><atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/peli/automated-whitebox-fuzz-testing-with-sage/rss/default.aspx" /><description>Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE</description><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/</link><language>en-us</language><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:13:02 GMT</pubDate><lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:13:02 GMT</lastBuildDate><generator>EvNet (EvNet, Version=1.0.3608.3122, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null)</generator><item><title>Re: Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE</title><description>&lt;p&gt;Makes you wonder just how many advances we are going to get because of symbolic anylsis of constraints.&lt;/p&gt;</description><comments></comments><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=479179</link><pubDate>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:13:02 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=479179</guid><evnet:views>0</evnet:views><evnet:viewtrackingurl>http://channel9.msdn.com/479179/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0</evnet:viewtrackingurl><evnet:previewtext>Makes you wonder just how many advances we are going to get because of symbolic anylsis of constraints.</evnet:previewtext><dc:creator>cdwatkins</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss></wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://channel9.msdn.com/479179/Trackback.aspx</trackback:ping></item><item><title>Re: Re: Re: Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE</title><description>&lt;p&gt;i see, thanks :) &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;</description><comments></comments><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478981</link><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:35:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478981</guid><evnet:views>0</evnet:views><evnet:viewtrackingurl>http://channel9.msdn.com/478981/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0</evnet:viewtrackingurl><evnet:previewtext>i see, thanks :) 
&amp;nbsp;</evnet:previewtext><dc:creator>Allan Lindqvist</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss></wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://channel9.msdn.com/478981/Trackback.aspx</trackback:ping></item><item><title>Re: Re: Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE</title><description>&lt;p&gt;SAGE and Pex both use some of the same techniques (like DART), but SAGE is for security testing of unmanaged code (x86 binary analysis) while Pex is for unit testing of managed code (MSIL .NET binaries).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For more information on how they differ, please see &lt;a href="http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/pg/public_psfiles/ieeesw2008.pdf"&gt;http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/pg/public_psfiles/ieeesw2008.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patrice&lt;/p&gt;</description><comments></comments><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478829</link><pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 00:19:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478829</guid><evnet:views>0</evnet:views><evnet:viewtrackingurl>http://channel9.msdn.com/478829/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0</evnet:viewtrackingurl><evnet:previewtext>SAGE and Pex both use some of the same techniques (like DART), but SAGE is for security testing of unmanaged code (x86 binary analysis) while Pex is for unit testing of managed code (MSIL .NET binaries).
For more information on how they differ, please see&amp;#8230;</evnet:previewtext><dc:creator>patriceg</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss></wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://channel9.msdn.com/478829/Trackback.aspx</trackback:ping></item><item><title>Re: Patrice Godefroid - Automated Whitebox Fuzz Testing with SAGE</title><description>&lt;p&gt;cool :) but isnt this pex? maybe sage is the new name for pex?&lt;/p&gt;</description><comments></comments><link>http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478825</link><pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:45:31 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">http://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Peli/Automated-Whitebox-Fuzz-Testing-with-SAGE/?CommentID=478825</guid><evnet:views>0</evnet:views><evnet:viewtrackingurl>http://channel9.msdn.com/478825/WebViewBug.aspx?EVT=0</evnet:viewtrackingurl><evnet:previewtext>cool :) but isnt this pex? maybe sage is the new name for pex?</evnet:previewtext><dc:creator>Allan Lindqvist</dc:creator><slash:comments>0</slash:comments><wfw:commentRss></wfw:commentRss><trackback:ping>http://channel9.msdn.com/478825/Trackback.aspx</trackback:ping></item></channel></rss>