2019-07-15. If it does not exist, the program cannot perform the desired behavior so it doesn't matter whether I handle the error or allow the program to die dereferencing a null value." (Or use the ternary operator if you prefer). Depending upon the type and size of the application, it may be possible to free memory that is being used elsewhere so that execution can continue. Il suffit de nous contacter ! 2nd Edition. [1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration, [2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019, [3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020, [4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021, [5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022, [6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2, [7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), [8] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4, [9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5, [10] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004, [11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0, [12] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1, [13] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1, [14] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4, [15] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5, [16] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6, [17] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7, [18] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9, [19] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10, [20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1, [21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2, [22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3, [23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4, [24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5, [25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6, [26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7, [27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8, [28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9, [29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10, [30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11, [31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1, [32] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2, [33] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00, desc.controlflow.dotnet.missing_check_against_null, desc.controlflow.java.missing_check_against_null, (Generated from version 2022.4.0.0009 of the Fortify Secure Coding Rulepacks), Fortify Taxonomy: Software Security Errors. set them to NULL once they are freed: If you are working with a multi-threaded or otherwise asynchronous This table shows the weaknesses and high level categories that are related to this weakness. Null-pointer dereferences, while common, can generally be found and corrected in a simple way. If you preorder a special airline meal (e.g. The programmer assumes that the files are always 1 kilobyte in size and therefore ignores the return value from Read(). LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed * [PATCH] dm: fix dax_dev NULL dereference @ 2019-07-30 11:37 Pankaj Gupta 2019-07-30 11:38 ` Pankaj Gupta 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Pankaj Gupta @ 2019-07-30 11:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: snitzer, dan.j.williams Cc: dm-devel, linux-nvdimm, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel, agk, pagupta 'Murphy Zhou' reports . Reply Cancel Cancel; Top Take the following code: Integer num; num = new Integer(10); Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an OS Command ('OS Command Injection') Fix : Analysis found that this is a false positive result; no code changes are required. NIST. Did the call to malloc() fail because req_size was too large or because there were too many requests being handled at the same time? The ftrace implementation in the Linux kernel before 3.8.8 allows local users to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and system crash) or possibly have unspecified other impact by leveraging the CAP_SYS_ADMIN capability for write access to the (1) set_ftrace_pid or (2) set_graph_function file, and then making an lseek system call. 3 FortifyJava 8 - Fortify : Null dereference for Java 8 Java 8 fortify Null Dereference null When working on a few Null Dereferencing warnings from Fortify, I was wondering if we could use standard .Net CodeContracts clauses to help Fortify in figuring out the exceptions. ; Fix #308: Status color of tests in left frame; Fix #284: Enhance TEAM Engine to evaluate if core conformance classes are configured Copy link. Follows a very simple code sample that should reproduce the issue: In this simple excerpt Fortify complains that "typedObj" can be null in the return statement. Here is a code snippet: getAuth() should not return null. One can also violate the caller-callee contract from the other side. 3.7. Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most. If the program is performing an atomic operation, it can leave the system in an inconsistent state. View - a subset of CWE entries that provides a way of examining CWE content. ImmuniWeb. One weakness, X, can directly create the conditions that are necessary to cause another weakness, Y, to enter a vulnerable condition. OS allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash from null dereference) or execute arbitrary code via a crafted request during authentication protocol selection. Improper Check for Unusual or Exceptional Conditions, Unchecked Return Value to NULL Pointer Dereference, Memory Allocation with Excessive Size Value, Improperly Controlled Sequential Memory Allocation, OWASP Top Ten 2004 Category A9 - Denial of Service, CERT C Secure Coding Standard (2008) Chapter 4 - Expressions (EXP), CERT C Secure Coding Standard (2008) Chapter 9 - Memory Management (MEM), CERT C++ Secure Coding Section 03 - Expressions (EXP), CERT C++ Secure Coding Section 08 - Memory Management (MEM), SFP Secondary Cluster: Faulty Pointer Use, SEI CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java - Guidelines 02. More specific than a Pillar Weakness, but more general than a Base Weakness. Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow! The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Micro Focus. The program can dereference a null-pointer because it does not check the return value of a function that might return null. The nature of simulating nature: A Q&A with IBM Quantum researcher Dr. Jamie We've added a "Necessary cookies only" option to the cookie consent popup. When you assign the value of 10 on the second line, your value of 10 is written into the memory location referred to by x. case " Null Dereference ": return 476; // Fortify reports weak randomness issues under Obsolete by ESAPI, rather than in // the Insecure Randomness category if it thinks you are using ESAPI. Note that this code is also vulnerable to a buffer overflow (CWE-119). Penticton Regional Hospital Diagnostic Imaging, The Phase identifies a point in the life cycle at which introduction may occur, while the Note provides a typical scenario related to introduction during the given phase. Avoid Returning null from Methods. This information is often useful in understanding where a weakness fits within the context of external information sources. There are some Fortify links at the end of the article for your reference. are no complete fixes aside from contentious programming, the following From a user's perspective that often manifests itself as poor usability. Share Improve this answer Follow edited Jun 4, 2019 at 17:08 answered Jun 4, 2019 at 17:01 Thierry 5,170 33 39 Pillar - a weakness that is the most abstract type of weakness and represents a theme for all class/base/variant weaknesses related to it. Class - a weakness that is described in a very abstract fashion, typically independent of any specific language or technology. "Security problems caused by dereferencing null . Denial of service Flooding Resource exhaustion Sustained client engagement Denial of service problems in C# Infinite loop Economic Denial of Sustainability (EDoS) Amplification Other amplification examples There are too few details in this report for us to be able to work on it. Take the following code: Integer num; num = new Integer(10); So you have a couple of choices: Ignore the warning. These relationships are defined as ChildOf, ParentOf, MemberOf and give insight to similar items that may exist at higher and lower levels of abstraction. Can archive.org's Wayback Machine ignore some query terms? If I had to guess, the tool you're using is complaining about our use of Math.random() but we don't rely on it being cryptographically secure. Anything that requires dynamic memory should be buried inside an RAII object that releases the memory when it goes out of scope. C#/VB.NET/ASP.NET. Connection String Parameter Pollution. In addition, relationships such as PeerOf and CanAlsoBe are defined to show similar weaknesses that the user may want to explore. Apple. a NullPointerException. Here is a code snippet: public class Example { private Collection<Auth> Authorities; public Example (SomeUser user) { for (String role: user.getAuth ()) { //This is where Fortify gives me a null dereference Authorities.add (new Auth (role)); } } private List<String> getAuth () { return null; } } java fortify Share Improve this question Description. If an attacker can create a smaller file, the program will recycle the remainder of the data from the previous user and treat it as though it belongs to the attacker. Null-pointer dereferences, while common, can generally be found and Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience. Dereference before null check (REVERSE_INULL) There may be a null pointer exception, or else the comparison against null is unnecessary. To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader. and Gary McGraw. 2. If an attacker can force the function to fail or otherwise return a value that is not expected, then the subsequent program logic could lead to a vulnerability, because the product is not in a state that the programmer assumes. Redundant Null Check. <. Address the Null Dereference issues identified by the Fortify scan. A NULL pointer dereference occurs when the application dereferences a pointer that it expects to be valid, but is NULL, typically causing a crash or exit. The Likelihood provides information about how likely the specific consequence is expected to be seen relative to the other consequences in the list. . It's simply a check to make sure the variable is not null. The modules cover the full breadth and depth of topics for PCI Section 6.5 compliance and the items that are important for secure software development. attacker might be able to use the resulting exception to bypass security Java Null Dereference when setting a field to null - Fortify, How Intuit democratizes AI development across teams through reusability. What are the differences between a HashMap and a Hashtable in Java? null dereference fortify fix java Follow us. To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader. Compliance Failure. Null-pointer exceptions usually occur when one or more of the programmer's assumptions is violated. If an attacker provides an address that appears to be well-formed, but the address does not resolve to a hostname, then the call to gethostbyaddr() will return NULL. Even when exception handling is being used, it can still be very difficult to return the software to a safe state of operation. Use automated static analysis tools that target this type of weakness. vegan) just to try it, does this inconvenience the caterers and staff? Giannini Guitar Model 2, Is this from a fortify web scan, or from a static code analysis? Removed issues. If I had to guess, the tool you're using is complaining about our use of Math.random() but we don't rely on it being cryptographically secure. For example, if a program fails to call chdir() after calling chroot(), it violates the contract that specifies how to change the active root directory in a secure fashion. Cross-Session Contamination. NULL pointer dereferences usually result in the failure of the process unless exception handling (on some platforms) is available and implemented. Furthermore, if the end of the file is reached before any characters are read, fgets() returns without writing anything to buf. The program might dereference a null-pointer because it does not check the return value of a function that might return null. When it comes to these specific properties, you're safe. Expressions (EXP), SEI CERT C Coding Standard - Guidelines 12. Bny Mellon Layoffs 2021, vegan) just to try it, does this inconvenience the caterers and staff? Copyright 20062023, The MITRE Corporation. a property named cmd defined. The following code uses Java's SecureRandom class to generate a cryptographically strong pseudo-random number (DO THIS): public static int generateRandom (int maximumValue) { SecureRandom ranGen = new SecureRandom (); return ranGen.nextInt (maximumValue); } Edit on GitHub "Writing Secure Code". corrected in a simple way. A check-after-dereference error occurs when a program dereferences a pointer that can be, [1] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration, [2] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2019, [3] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2020, [4] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2021, [5] Standards Mapping - Common Weakness Enumeration Top 25 2022, [6] Standards Mapping - DISA Control Correlation Identifier Version 2, [7] Standards Mapping - General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), [8] Standards Mapping - Motor Industry Software Reliability Association (MISRA) C Guidelines 2012, [9] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 4, [10] Standards Mapping - NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 5, [11] Standards Mapping - OWASP Top 10 2004, [12] Standards Mapping - OWASP Application Security Verification Standard 4.0, [13] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 1.1, [14] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.0, [15] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.1, [16] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2, [17] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard Version 3.2.1, [18] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.0, [19] Standards Mapping - Payment Card Industry Software Security Framework 1.1, [20] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.1, [21] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.4, [22] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.5, [23] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.6, [24] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.7, [25] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.9, [26] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 3.10, [27] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.1, [28] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.2, [29] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.3, [30] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.4, [31] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.5, [32] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.6, [33] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.7, [34] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.8, [35] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.9, [36] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.10, [37] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 4.11, [38] Standards Mapping - Security Technical Implementation Guide Version 5.1, [39] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium 24 + 2, [40] Standards Mapping - Web Application Security Consortium Version 2.00.