SQLite is the most thoroughly tested codebase I'm aware of [1]. It has seven times more test code than non-test code. 100% branch coverage. If even SQLite can have a RCE vulnerability, I'm convinced that it is not feasible for anybody to write safe C code.

[1] https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html

100% branch, line coverage means nothing. It's about logical coverage. What are you testing for? You are not testing lines of code, but logic.
Isn't that the definition of branch testing, to test all possible branches within code and also testing the logic in all of those branches?
You test all possible executions of your program when you test with all possible data inputs, which is infinite.
That is why I like using random data generators for tests. You can input some static data and then the rest is random. Every once in a while a bug pops out when you see a test fail that was previously passing.
None of the above methods are used for testing. You use boundary testing, branch testing, equivalence partitioning etc. Random data is not a good method of testing.
Except for the fact that it is exactly the method that has been used to discover a large number of critical bugs in the most popular OSS projects (including SQLite): http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/afl/
Fuzzing isn't really practical if all you do is just generate a totally random bit stream for input. There are many much more clever and robust strategies to hit as many edge cases as possible. Check AFL[1] for some details on generating smart random input files. You can also combine that with pretty advanced dynamic execution analysis to fuzz against unknown processor instruction sets, like in sandsifter[2].

[1]: http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/afl/

[2]: https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/sandsifter