This site is the archived OWASP Foundation Wiki and is no longer accepting Account Requests.
To view the new OWASP Foundation website, please visit https://owasp.org
Difference between revisions of "Using the wrong operator"
From OWASP
Weilin Zhong (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Template:SecureSoftware}} | {{Template:SecureSoftware}} | ||
| + | {{Template:Vulnerability}} | ||
| − | == | + | [[Category:FIXME|This is the text from the old template. This needs to be rewritten using the new template.]] |
| + | |||
| + | Last revision (mm/dd/yy): '''{{REVISIONMONTH}}/{{REVISIONDAY}}/{{REVISIONYEAR}}''' | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[ASDR_TOC_Vulnerabilities|Vulnerabilities Table of Contents]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[ASDR Table of Contents]] | ||
| + | __TOC__ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Description== | ||
This is a common error given when an operator is used which does not make sense for the context appears. | This is a common error given when an operator is used which does not make sense for the context appears. | ||
| − | + | '''Consequences''' | |
Unspecified. | Unspecified. | ||
| − | + | '''Exposure period''' | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | * Implementation: Many logic errors can lead to this condition. It can be exacerbated by lack, of or misuse, of mitigating technologies. | + | * Pre-design through Build: The use of tools to detect this problem is recommended. |
| + | * Implementation: Many logic errors can lead to this condition. It can be exacerbated by lack, of or misuse, of mitigating technologies. | ||
| − | + | '''Platform''' | |
| − | * Languages: Any | + | * Languages: Any |
| + | * Operating platforms: Any | ||
| − | + | '''Required resources''' | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
Any | Any | ||
| − | + | '''Severity''' | |
Medium | Medium | ||
| − | + | '''Likelihood of exploit''' | |
Low | Low | ||
| − | + | These types of bugs generally are the result of a typo. Although most of them can easily be found when testing of the program, it is important that one correct these problems, since they almost certainly will break the code. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | == | + | ==Risk Factors== |
| + | |||
| + | TBD | ||
| − | |||
| − | ==Examples == | + | ==Examples== |
In C: | In C: | ||
| Line 52: | Line 60: | ||
</pre> | </pre> | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | ==Related [[Attacks]]== | |
| + | |||
| + | * [[Attack 1]] | ||
| + | * [[Attack 2]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Related [[Vulnerabilities]]== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[Vulnerability 1]] | ||
| + | * [[Vulnerabiltiy 2]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Related [[Controls]]== | ||
| + | * Pre-design through Build: Most static analysis programs should be able to catch these errors. | ||
| + | * Implementation: Save an index variable. This is the recommended solution. Rather than subtract pointers from one another, use an index variable of the same size as the pointers in question. Use this variable "walk" from one pointer to the other and calculate the difference. Always sanity check this number. | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==Related [[Technical Impacts]]== | ||
| + | |||
| + | * [[Technical Impact 1]] | ||
| + | * [[Technical Impact 2]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | ==References== | ||
| + | |||
| + | TBD | ||
| + | [[Category:FIXME|add links | ||
| + | |||
| + | In addition, one should classify vulnerability based on the following subcategories: Ex:<nowiki>[[Category:Error Handling Vulnerability]]</nowiki> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Availability Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Authorization Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Authentication Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Concurrency Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Configuration Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Cryptographic Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Encoding Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Error Handling Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Input Validation Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Logging and Auditing Vulnerability | ||
| + | |||
| + | Session Management Vulnerability]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | __NOTOC__ | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:OWASP ASDR Project]] | ||
[[Category:Vulnerability]] | [[Category:Vulnerability]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:General Logic Error Vulnerability]] | [[Category:General Logic Error Vulnerability]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]] | [[Category:OWASP_CLASP_Project]] | ||
Revision as of 16:00, 3 October 2008
This is a Vulnerability. To view all vulnerabilities, please see the Vulnerability Category page.
Last revision (mm/dd/yy): 10/3/2008
Vulnerabilities Table of Contents
[hide]
Description
This is a common error given when an operator is used which does not make sense for the context appears.
Consequences
Unspecified.
Exposure period
- Pre-design through Build: The use of tools to detect this problem is recommended.
- Implementation: Many logic errors can lead to this condition. It can be exacerbated by lack, of or misuse, of mitigating technologies.
Platform
- Languages: Any
- Operating platforms: Any
Required resources
Any
Severity
Medium
Likelihood of exploit
Low
These types of bugs generally are the result of a typo. Although most of them can easily be found when testing of the program, it is important that one correct these problems, since they almost certainly will break the code.
Risk Factors
TBD
Examples
In C:
char foo; foo=a+c;
Related Attacks
Related Vulnerabilities
Related Controls
- Pre-design through Build: Most static analysis programs should be able to catch these errors.
- Implementation: Save an index variable. This is the recommended solution. Rather than subtract pointers from one another, use an index variable of the same size as the pointers in question. Use this variable "walk" from one pointer to the other and calculate the difference. Always sanity check this number.
Related Technical Impacts
References
TBD
