Industry - Automotive Landing page

“One of the biggest advantages of instrumented fuzz testing is that you can execute your code in a Software-in-the-Loop simulator. My favourite part of instrumented fuzzing is that finding the root cause is so easy, and for a manager, it means I can save budget.”

Michael Von WencksternProduct Cybersecurity Governance, Risk and Compliance Specialist, Continental AG

"Thanks to Code Intelligence fuzzing approaches, our security testing became significantly more effective. All our developers are now able to fix business critical bugs early in the development process, without false-positives."

Andreas WeichslgartnerSenior Technical Security Engineer, CARIAD

”Thanks to Code Intelligence we were able to remediate deeply hidden issues, allowing us to ensure our vehicular software’s optimal functionality and safety. Coming up with the right unit tests for these cases would have been super difficult. With Code Intelligence’s AI-powered tests, we had the first finding within hours!”

Saleh HeydariVP of Software Engineering, XOS Trucks

”Code Intelligence helps developers ship secure software by providing the necessary integrations to test their code at each pull request, without ever having to leave their favorite environment. It's like having an automated security expert always by your side.”

Thomas DohmkeCEO, GitHub

Despite widespread static analysis use, every year since 2019 there has been more than 200 common Vulnerabilities and Exposures identifiers (CVEs) related to automotive components and services reported.
The most frequent issues are memory corruption errors, e.g. buffer overflow, out-of-bounds write, out-of-bounds read, use after free.
Vulnerabilities found too late can lead to delayed releases, costly over-the-air updates, or even recalls. In 2023, automotive software was involved in nearly 15% of recall incidents.

Click here to see the full list of vulnerabilities you can find with CI Fuzz.

CWE-119	Improper Restriction of Operations Within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer	CWE-416	Use After Free
CWE-823	Use of Out-of-Range Pointer Offset	CWE-476	NULL Pointer Dereference
CWE-786	Access of Memory Location Before Start of Buffer	CWE-590	Free Memory Not on the Heap
CWE-680	Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow	CWE-362	Signal Handler Race Condition
CWE-466	Return of Pointer Value Outside of Expected Range	CWE-366	Race Condition Within a Thread
CWE-787	Out-of-Bounds Write	CWE-367	Time-of-Check Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Race Condition
CWE-125	Out-of-Bounds Read	CWE-368	Context Switching Race Condition
CWE-129	Improper Validation of Array Index	CWE-421	Race Condition During Access to Alternate Channel
CWE-193	Incorrect Calculation of Buffer Size	CWE-1223	Context Switching Race Condition
CWE-193	Off-by-One Error	CWE-662	Improper Synchronization
CWE-195	Signed to Unsigned Conversion Error	CWE-758	Reliance on Undefined, Unspecified, or Implementation-Defined Behavior
CWE-839	Numeric Range Comparison Without Minimum Check	CWE-562	Return of Stack Variable Address
CWE-843	Access of Resource Using Incompatible Type ("Type Confusion")	CWE-587	Assignment of a Fixed Address to a Pointer
CWE-1257	Improper Access Control Applied to Mirrored or Aliased Memory Ranges	CWE-588	Attempt to Access Child of a Non-Structure Pointer
CWE-190	Integer Overflow or Wraparound	CWE-1102	Reliance on Machine-Dependent Third-Party Components
CWE-20	Improper Input Validation	CWE-1105	Insufficient Encapsulation of Machine-Dependent Functionality
CWE-415	Double Free

Join Industry Leaders and follow in the footsteps of companies like CARIAD, Bosch, and Continental. Detect critical bugs early in the testing stages and achieve compliance with industry standards.

Book your free demo with one of our senior engineers now and take the first step towards robust, secure software development with Code Intelligence.

Automate software testing for embedded systems.
Detect critical bugs & vulnerabilities early in the development.
Uncover only actual issues without false positives.
Enable developers to reproduce & fix issues in minutes, not weeks.
Ensure compliance with industry standards.

1. Static Analysis (SAST) generates many false positives.
It reports issues that aren’t actually a problem and produces duplicates.

2. Static Analysis can’t detect all types of vulnerabilities.
Because it doesn’t analyze the program during execution, SAST can’t detect dynamic or runtime-specific issues such as complex buffer overflows, use-after-free, double-free errors, heap corruption, and others.

Learn more about its limitation and how to overcome them with fuzz testing by downloading a free copy of the white paper.

Get free copy now

White paper - Fuzz Testing + Staticc Analysis (Mockup)

Hardware-independent automotive software testing

Three reasons to elevate your automotive software security with fuzz testing

Vulnerabilities in automotive software are increasing

Fuzz Testing with Code Intelligence

Find what others miss – and get it fixed

From start to findings – with one command

Don’t just comply – make your product robust

Why choose Code Intelligence?

Why Static Code Analysis alone can't prevent all vulnerabilities

Security resources

White paper - How Fuzzing Complements Static Analysis

CARIAD Improves Secure Software Development

White paper - Fuzz testing in ISO/SAE 21434