When Software Vulnerabilities Meet Road Safety

Modern vehicles are no longer purely mechanical machines, they’re sophisticated distributed computing systems on wheels. A luxury vehicle today contains over 100 million lines of code, more than a modern fighter jet. With up to 150 electronic control units (ECUs) communicating across multiple network domains, contemporary automobiles rely on robust protocol implementations to ensure safety-critical systems function reliably. When these protocol implementations contain vulnerabilities, the consequences extend beyond data breaches into the realm of physical safety.

The automotive industry faces a unique cybersecurity challenge. Traditional safety engineering has decades of maturity, with well-established processes for mechanical and electrical reliability. Cybersecurity, by contrast, represents relatively new territory particularly the challenge of securing complex distributed systems against sophisticated adversaries. The convergence of connectivity, autonomy, and software-defined functionality creates unprecedented attack surfaces that demand equally sophisticated security validation.

ISO/SAE 21434: The New Security Imperative

The automotive industry has responded to these challenges with ISO/SAE 21434, the international standard for cybersecurity engineering in road vehicles. This standard establishes requirements throughout the vehicle lifecycle from concept phase through production, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. A critical component of ISO/SAE 21434 compliance involves verification and validation of security controls, including rigorous testing of protocol implementations.

ProtoCrawler directly supports ISO/SAE 21434 compliance activities by providing:

Work Product Evidence – Detailed test reports and vulnerability assessments serve as verification artifacts demonstrating security validation activities.

Cybersecurity Testing – Clause 10 of ISO/SAE 21434 requires cybersecurity testing of implementations. ProtoCrawler’s intelligent fuzzing satisfies these testing requirements with protocol-specific validation.

Vulnerability Management – Identified vulnerabilities feed into the vulnerability management process required by Clause 8, enabling risk assessment and mitigation planning.

Continuous Security Validation – As components evolve through development and maintenance, regression testing ensures security posture doesn’t degrade over time.

SOME/IP: The Backbone of Modern Automotive Communication

Scalable service-Oriented MiddlewarE over IP (SOME/IP) has emerged as the de facto standard for service-oriented communication in modern vehicles. Developed to support the transition from traditional CAN-based architectures to Ethernet-based zonal architectures, SOME/IP enables dynamic service discovery, flexible communication patterns, and bandwidth-efficient data transfer. Its prevalence in advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), infotainment, and autonomous driving functions makes SOME/IP security critical.

Service Discovery Protocol (SD)

SOME/IP-SD enables dynamic discovery of services across the vehicle network. This flexibility creates convenience but also introduces security considerations that ProtoCrawler systematically tests:

Service Advertisement Processing – ECUs advertise available services through multicast messages. ProtoCrawler fuzzes service advertisements with malformed service identifiers, invalid version numbers, corrupted endpoint information, and inconsistent option structures. This identifies parsing vulnerabilities that could enable service spoofing or denial of service through advertisement flooding.

Service Request Handling – Clients discover services by sending find service messages. Testing with invalid service identifiers, malformed subscription parameters, and timing violations uncovers weaknesses in request processing that could enable unauthorized service discovery or resource exhaustion.

Event Group Subscription – SOME/IP uses event groups for publish-subscribe communication. Fuzzing subscription messages tests access control enforcement, identifies race conditions in subscription management, and reveals vulnerabilities in event notification handling that could enable unauthorized data access or injection.

Option Processing – SOME/IP-SD extensibility relies on options within service messages. ProtoCrawler tests option parsing with invalid option types, incorrect length fields, nested options, and option ordering violations to identify buffer overflows, parsing errors, and implementation assumptions that could be exploited.

Method Invocation and Remote Procedure Calls

SOME/IP’s RPC mechanism enables ECUs to invoke methods on remote services. These invocations may control safety-critical functions, making robust implementation essential:

Request Message Validation – ProtoCrawler generates malformed method requests with invalid service IDs, corrupted method IDs, inconsistent message lengths, and boundary-violating parameter values. This reveals how implementations handle unexpected inputs identifying crashes, hangs, or incorrect error responses that could be exploited.

Parameter Serialization Testing – SOME/IP serializes complex data types including structures, arrays, unions, and strings. Fuzzing serialized parameters with type confusion, length mismatches, invalid union discriminators, and boundary violations identifies deserialization vulnerabilities that could enable code execution or information disclosure.

Response Processing – Clients must robustly handle method responses and error codes. Testing with malformed responses, unexpected return codes, and inconsistent payload structures identifies client-side vulnerabilities that could be triggered by malicious or compromised services.

Session and Sequence Management – Request-response correlation relies on session and request IDs. Fuzzing these identifiers tests replay attack protection, session hijacking resistance, and proper request-response matching under adversarial conditions.

Event and Field Notification Mechanisms

SOME/IP’s publish-subscribe model enables efficient data distribution for sensor fusion, state synchronization, and status monitoring:

Event Notification Processing – Subscribers receive event notifications containing sensor data, state changes, or diagnostic information. ProtoCrawler tests event handling with corrupted payloads, invalid timestamps, out-of-order notifications, and event flooding to identify vulnerabilities in event processing pipelines and rate limiting mechanisms.

Field Getter/Setter Operations – Fields provide state access across ECUs. Testing field operations with access control violations, concurrent modification patterns, and invalid value ranges reveals implementation weaknesses in state management and access control enforcement.

Serialization Format Vulnerabilities – SOME/IP’s serialization format (SOME/IP Protocol or SOME/IP Transformation Protocol) handles complex nested structures. Fuzzing deeply nested data, circular references, and extreme length values identifies stack exhaustion, heap corruption, and parser vulnerabilities.

Diagnostics over IP (DoIP): The Gateway to Vehicle Access

DoIP provides IP-based access to vehicle diagnostic services, replacing traditional physical diagnostic connectors with network-based access. While this enables remote diagnostics, over-the-air updates, and advanced fleet management, it also creates network-accessible entry points that must be rigorously secured.

Connection Management and Authentication

DoIP establishes diagnostic connections through a well-defined handshake process. ProtoCrawler tests this critical security boundary:

Vehicle Discovery and Announcement – Vehicles announce diagnostic capabilities via UDP. Fuzzing announcement messages identifies information disclosure vulnerabilities, tests rate limiting of discovery requests, and validates handling of malformed discovery packets.

Routing Activation – Establishing a diagnostic session requires routing activation with authentication. ProtoCrawler tests authentication bypass attempts, credential validation, activation data processing, and session management to ensure unauthorized diagnostic access is prevented.

Connection State Management – DoIP maintains connection state across multiple diagnostic requests. Testing state transitions with invalid sequences, concurrent connection attempts, and timeout violations identifies race conditions and state machine vulnerabilities that could enable session hijacking or denial of service.

TLS Integration – When DoIP operates over TLS, the security depends on both protocols. ProtoCrawler tests the integration, including certificate validation, cipher suite negotiation, and secure channel establishment, to ensure cryptographic protections are correctly implemented.

Diagnostic Message Handling

Once connected, DoIP encapsulates UDS diagnostic messages. The gateway function between network and vehicle buses creates security-critical translation points:

Message Routing Validation – DoIP routes diagnostic messages to specific ECUs. Fuzzing routing information tests access control enforcement, validates ECU addressing schemes, and identifies whether routing logic can be manipulated to access restricted ECUs.

Payload Processing – Diagnostic payloads vary widely in structure and content. Testing with oversized payloads, malformed service identifiers, and invalid parameter combinations identifies buffer overflows, parsing errors, and improper error handling in gateway implementations.

Protocol Translation Security – DoIP gateways translate between IP and vehicle bus protocols (CAN, FlexRay, etc.). Testing this translation with edge cases, timing violations, and protocol anomalies identifies vulnerabilities in the translation layer that could enable attacks on vehicle buses.

Unified Diagnostic Services (UDS): The Language of Vehicle Diagnostics

UDS (ISO 14229) defines the application layer protocol for vehicle diagnostics, providing services for reading diagnostic trouble codes, accessing data identifiers, controlling ECU states, and performing software updates. UDS security is fundamental because these services enable deep access to vehicle functionality.

Diagnostic Session Control

UDS defines multiple diagnostic sessions with different access levels. Session management represents a critical security control:

Session Transition Testing – ProtoCrawler fuzzes session control services with invalid session types, unauthorized transition attempts, and rapid session switching to identify access control bypasses, race conditions in session management, and improper state cleanup.

Session Timeout Handling – Sessions should timeout after inactivity. Testing timeout mechanisms with edge case timings, concurrent activity, and state manipulation identifies whether timeouts are properly enforced and whether session state can be maintained inappropriately.

Default Session Security – Even the default diagnostic session should resist attack. Fuzzing default session services ensures that security doesn’t depend solely on session restrictions and that information disclosure is prevented even in less privileged sessions.

Security Access Service

UDS includes a challenge-response mechanism for authenticating diagnostic tools. The security access service protects privileged operations, making its robustness critical:

Seed Generation Quality – The random seed provided to diagnostic tools must be cryptographically secure. While ProtoCrawler cannot directly assess seed randomness, it tests seed generation behavior under various conditions to identify predictable patterns or implementation weaknesses.

Key Validation – Response key validation must resist brute force and timing attacks. Testing with incorrect keys, near-miss keys, and timing analysis attempts validates that key verification is implemented securely without revealing information through timing channels.

Lockout Mechanisms – Failed authentication attempts should trigger lockout. Fuzzing the authentication process with repeated failures, rapid retry attempts, and lockout bypass attempts ensures rate limiting and lockout mechanisms function correctly.

Security Access Bypass Testing – ProtoCrawler attempts various bypass techniques including state manipulation, race conditions, and protocol violations to ensure security access cannot be circumvented through implementation flaws.

Data Identifier Services

Reading and writing data identifiers provides access to vehicle parameters, configuration data, and operational state. These services require careful access control:

Data Identifier Validation – ProtoCrawler fuzzes data identifier values with out-of-range identifiers, protected identifiers, and sequential scanning to identify access control gaps, undocumented identifiers, and information disclosure vulnerabilities.

Read/Write Permission Enforcement – Some identifiers should be read-only or restricted to specific sessions. Testing write attempts to read-only identifiers and reads of protected data validates permission enforcement and identifies privilege escalation opportunities.

Data Format Handling – Data identifiers encode values in various formats. Fuzzing data writes with invalid formats, out-of-range values, and type confusion attempts identifies input validation weaknesses that could corrupt ECU state or trigger undefined behavior.

Routine Control Services

UDS routines enable complex operations like component tests, calibrations, and software updates. These powerful functions demand robust security:

Routine Identifier Authorization – Not all routines should be accessible in all sessions. ProtoCrawler tests routine invocation with access control violations, identifies undocumented routines, and validates that safety-critical routines are properly protected.

Routine Parameter Validation – Routine parameters control operational details. Fuzzing parameters with extreme values, invalid combinations, and buffer overflow attempts identifies input validation weaknesses in routine implementations.

Routine State Management – Routines progress through start, running, and result states. Testing state transitions with invalid sequences, concurrent invocations, and interruption scenarios identifies race conditions and improper state handling.

Request Download/Upload Services

Software updates and calibration data transfers use download and upload services. These represent high-risk operations requiring stringent security:

Memory Address Validation – Download/upload requests specify memory addresses and sizes. ProtoCrawler tests with invalid address ranges, overlapping regions, and protected memory areas to ensure memory protection and address validation are correctly implemented.

Transfer Data Security – Data transfer occurs in blocks with sequence numbering. Fuzzing block sequence numbers, block sizes, and data content identifies sequence validation weaknesses, buffer overflows, and race conditions in data handling.

Transfer Completion Verification – Transferred data must be verified before activation. Testing with corrupted transfers, incomplete sequences, and verification bypass attempts ensures data integrity is properly validated before software or calibration changes take effect.

TCP/IP Stack Security: The Network Foundation

Modern vehicles implement full TCP/IP stacks to support Ethernet-based architectures, vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communication, and cloud connectivity. These network stacks must resist attacks that have plagued internet-connected systems for decades.

IP Layer Vulnerabilities

ProtoCrawler tests IP implementations with automotive-specific considerations:

Fragmentation Handling – IP fragmentation creates complexity and attack opportunities. Testing with overlapping fragments, fragment floods, and tiny fragments identifies reassembly vulnerabilities and resource exhaustion conditions.

Options Processing – IP options are rarely used but must be handled correctly. Fuzzing with malformed options, invalid option lengths, and option combinations identifies parsing vulnerabilities in option handling code.

ICMP Processing – ICMP messages provide network diagnostics but can enable reconnaissance or denial of service. Testing ICMP handling ensures implementations don’t leak information or enable resource exhaustion through ICMP floods.

TCP Implementation Security

TCP’s complexity creates numerous vulnerability opportunities that ProtoCrawler systematically explores:

Connection Establishment – The three-way handshake must resist SYN flooding and connection hijacking. Testing with malformed handshakes, sequence number prediction attempts, and resource exhaustion attacks validates connection handling robustness.

Sequence Number Validation – TCP relies on sequence numbers for ordering and security. Fuzzing with sequence number violations, wrap-around conditions, and overlapping segments identifies acceptance window vulnerabilities and improper sequence validation.

Connection State Machine – TCP’s state machine has subtle transitions. Testing with invalid state transitions, simultaneous close scenarios, and rapid connection cycling identifies race conditions and improper state handling that could enable connection hijacking or denial of service.

Window Management – Flow control through window advertisements must handle edge cases. Testing with zero windows, window shrinking, and rapid window changes identifies deadlock conditions and flow control vulnerabilities.

UDP Implementation Testing

UDP’s simplicity doesn’t eliminate vulnerability potential:

Port Handling – UDP implementations must properly handle port numbers and socket binding. Testing with privileged ports, port reuse, and broadcast addresses identifies access control and resource management issues.

Checksum Validation – UDP checksums are optional but should be validated when present. Testing checksum handling ensures implementations don’t accept corrupted packets inappropriately.

Message Length Processing – UDP message length fields create classic vulnerability opportunities. Fuzzing length values identifies buffer overflows and improper length validation in UDP implementations.

TLS: Protecting Data in Transit

Transport Layer Security protects sensitive data transmitted between vehicles and infrastructure, mobile apps, and cloud services. TLS implementation vulnerabilities could expose authentication credentials, private data, or enable man-in-the-middle attacks.

Handshake Protocol Security

The TLS handshake establishes cryptographic parameters and authenticates parties. ProtoCrawler tests handshake implementations comprehensively:

Version Negotiation – TLS supports multiple versions with varying security properties. Testing version negotiation with downgrade attempts, unsupported versions, and version confusion attacks ensures implementations enforce secure version policies.

Cipher Suite Selection – Not all cipher suites provide adequate security. Fuzzing cipher suite negotiation validates that weak ciphers are rejected, preference ordering is enforced, and cipher suite selection cannot be manipulated to force weak cryptography.

Certificate Validation – Proper certificate validation prevents impersonation. ProtoCrawler tests with expired certificates, self-signed certificates, incorrect hostnames, invalid signature algorithms, and incomplete certificate chains to ensure implementations enforce proper validation.

Extension Handling – TLS extensions provide additional functionality. Testing extension processing with unknown extensions, malformed extension data, and extension ordering violations identifies parsing vulnerabilities and ensures extensions are handled safely.

Record Protocol Security

Once established, TLS protects application data through the record protocol:

Message Authentication – Record MACs prevent tampering. Testing with modified MACs, replayed records, and MAC stripping attempts ensures message authentication is properly enforced.

Encryption Security – Record encryption must resist attacks. While ProtoCrawler cannot break strong cryptography, it tests implementation aspects like IV handling, padding validation, and CBC-mode vulnerabilities (e.g., padding oracle attacks).

Sequence Number Handling – TLS uses sequence numbers to prevent replay attacks. Testing sequence number handling with wrap-around conditions, replayed messages, and out-of-order delivery validates replay protection.

Alert Processing – TLS alerts communicate errors and warnings. Testing alert handling ensures implementations respond appropriately without leaking information through timing or behavior differences.

Ethernet AVB: Time-Sensitive Networking for Automotive

Audio Video Bridging (AVB) and Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) provide guaranteed latency and bandwidth for safety-critical and multimedia applications. These protocols enable deterministic communication essential for ADAS and autonomous driving.

Stream Reservation Protocol (SRP)

SRP reserves bandwidth and establishes end-to-end paths with quality of service guarantees:

Attribute Propagation – SRP propagates stream reservation attributes across the network. ProtoCrawler tests attribute handling with malformed attributes, conflicting reservations, and resource over-subscription to identify reservation system vulnerabilities.

Admission Control – Bandwidth must be managed to maintain guarantees. Testing with excessive reservation requests, priority manipulation, and resource exhaustion attempts validates admission control and resource management.

Talker/Listener Registration – Stream endpoints register through SRP. Fuzzing registration messages identifies vulnerabilities in endpoint validation, stream ID handling, and registration state management.

Precision Time Protocol (PTP)

PTP synchronizes clocks across the vehicle network, essential for sensor fusion and coordinated control:

Time Synchronization Security – Manipulated time could disrupt safety functions. While ProtoCrawler’s primary focus is implementation robustness, testing PTP handling with timing anomalies, malformed PTP messages, and rapid time changes identifies vulnerabilities in time distribution.

Best Master Clock Algorithm – PTP selects the most accurate clock as master. Testing master selection with manipulated clock quality values, rapid role changes, and conflicting announcements identifies potential time synchronization manipulation.

Delay Measurement – PTP measures path delays for synchronization accuracy. Fuzzing delay measurement messages tests path delay handling and identifies potential denial of service through measurement message flooding.

Quality of Service Enforcement

AVB/TSN quality of service mechanisms must resist manipulation:

Priority Handling – Traffic prioritization must be enforced correctly. Testing with priority spoofing, priority inversion attempts, and mixed-priority flooding validates that high-priority safety-critical traffic maintains guarantees under attack.

Time-Aware Shaping – TSN schedules traffic transmission to meet latency requirements. Testing with traffic patterns designed to disrupt schedules, timing violations, and resource conflicts validates schedule enforcement and identifies conditions that could violate determinism guarantees.

The Automotive Threat Landscape: Real Risks Require Rigorous Testing

The consequences of automotive protocol vulnerabilities extend beyond theoretical concerns:

Vehicle Control Compromise – Vulnerabilities enabling unauthorized access to control systems could allow remote manipulation of steering, acceleration, or braking with direct safety implications.

Privacy Invasion – Connected vehicles generate extensive data about location, driving behavior, and personal information. Protocol vulnerabilities could enable unauthorized surveillance or data theft.

Fleet-Wide Attacks – Common protocol implementations across vehicle fleets mean a single vulnerability could affect millions of vehicles, enabling coordinated attacks or widespread disruption.

Safety System Disruption – ADAS features like automatic emergency braking, lane keeping assist, and adaptive cruise control depend on sensor data and inter-ECU communication. Protocol attacks could disable safety features or cause false activations.

Economic Impact – Vehicle recalls due to cybersecurity vulnerabilities are expensive, both financially and reputationally. Proactive security testing through fuzzing prevents costly post-production remediation.

Regulatory Compliance – UN R155 and other regulations mandate cybersecurity measures. Security testing provides evidence of due diligence and compliance with regulatory requirements.

ProtoCrawler’s Role in Automotive Security Validation

ProtoCrawler addresses the unique challenges of automotive protocol security:

ISO/SAE 21434 Alignment – Test artifacts and vulnerability reports directly support cybersecurity verification and validation requirements, providing traceable evidence for compliance demonstrations.

Multi-Protocol Coverage – Modern vehicles use numerous protocols simultaneously. ProtoCrawler’s comprehensive coverage enables security validation across the entire protocol stack rather than testing protocols in isolation.

Safety-Critical Awareness – Automotive testing must consider safety implications. ProtoCrawler can be configured to focus on security validation without triggering safety-critical operations in production-equivalent environments.

Supplier Chain Integration – OEMs source components from multiple suppliers. Standardized protocol security testing enables consistent security requirements across the supply chain and validates supplier implementation quality.

Continuous Security Validation – As vehicle software evolves through development, production, and field updates, continuous testing ensures security posture is maintained throughout the vehicle lifecycle.

Building Secure Automotive Ecosystems

Automotive cybersecurity requires a holistic approach spanning organizational processes, architectural design, and technical validation. Protocol security testing forms an essential component:

Security by Design – Integrating ProtoCrawler early in development enables security validation as protocols are implemented, when fixes are least expensive and architectural changes remain feasible.

Component Qualification – Before integrating third-party components, security testing validates implementation quality and identifies vulnerabilities that could compromise vehicle security.

Integration Testing – Protocol interactions create emergent behaviors. Testing integrated systems identifies vulnerabilities arising from component interactions that unit testing might miss.

Regression Prevention – Software updates and feature additions can introduce vulnerabilities. Automated regression testing ensures security improvements don’t degrade with each release.

Vulnerability Management – Discovered vulnerabilities feed into risk assessment, enabling informed decisions about mitigation priorities, compensating controls, and patching schedules.

The Road Ahead: Security as an Enabler

The automotive industry’s transformation toward software-defined vehicles, autonomous operation, and vehicle-to-everything connectivity creates unprecedented opportunities and unprecedented security challenges. Protocol security isn’t merely a compliance checkbox; it’s a fundamental enabler of innovation.

Consumers trust vehicles with their safety. Regulators demand demonstrable security. OEMs invest billions in advanced features. This convergence makes protocol security validation not optional but essential. ProtoCrawler provides the intelligent, comprehensive testing necessary to validate protocol implementations meet the security requirements of modern automotive systems.

The question isn’t whether to implement rigorous protocol security testing, but whether to discover vulnerabilities proactively during development or reactively after deployment. ProtoCrawler enables the proactive approach identifying and eliminating vulnerabilities before vehicles reach customers, before vulnerabilities are discovered by attackers, and before security incidents compromise safety or trust.

Conclusion: Security That Moves Forward Safely

Modern vehicles represent some of the most complex distributed systems in mass production. With complexity comes vulnerability potential, and with connectivity comes exposure. Automotive protocol security demands the same rigor applied to safety-critical mechanical systems systematic validation, comprehensive testing, and continuous improvement.

ProtoCrawler’s coverage of SOME/IP, DoIP, UDS, TCP/IP, TLS, and Ethernet AVB provides the testing depth necessary to build secure connected vehicles. From service-oriented communication to diagnostic access, from network stacks to time-sensitive networking, ProtoCrawler helps identify and eliminate protocol vulnerabilities throughout the vehicle architecture.

In an industry where safety and security converge, where software defines functionality, and where connectivity enables innovation, protocol security cannot be an afterthought. ProtoCrawler delivers the intelligent fuzzing capabilities necessary to validate implementations meet the security requirements of modern automotive systems because the road to autonomous, connected mobility must be paved with security.

---

Accelerate your automotive security validation with intelligent protocol fuzzing.

Learn more about ProtoCrawler and ISO/SAE 21434 compliance, book a demo and see Protocrawler in action

Related Protocols

Automotive cybersecurity requires testing across in-vehicle networks, V2X communications, and connectivity protocols:

In-Vehicle Network Protocols:

• CAN Bus – Controller Area Network, the backbone of vehicle electronic communications
• CAN-FD – CAN with Flexible Data rate for higher bandwidth
• LIN Bus – Local Interconnect Network for lower-speed automotive subsystems
• FlexRay – High-speed, deterministic protocol for safety-critical systems
• MOST – Media Oriented Systems Transport for infotainment
• Automotive Ethernet – Emerging high-bandwidth in-vehicle networking

Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X):

• DSRC/IEEE 802.11p – Dedicated short-range communications
• C-V2X – Cellular vehicle-to-everything communications

Connectivity & Telematics:

• DHCP – Network configuration in connected vehicle systems
• ARP – Address resolution in vehicle gateway systems

Diagnostic Protocols:

• UDS (ISO 14229) – Unified Diagnostic Services
• OBD-II – On-board diagnostics interface

Encoding & Messaging:

• ASN.1 – Used in V2X certificate management

Automotive protocol security is evolving from optional to mandatory, mirroring telecommunications’ regulatory trajectory. Learn about ProtoCrawler’s automotive testing capabilities or schedule an automotive security consultation.