Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Do not use the assignment operator in the contexts listed in the following table because doing so typically indicates programmer error and can result in unexpected behavior.

OperatorContext 
ifControlling expression
whileControlling expression
do ... whileControlling expression
forSecond operand
?:First operand
?:Second or third operands, where the ternary expression is used in any of these contexts
&& Either operand 
|| either operand 
,Second operand, when the comma expression is used in any of these contexts

Noncompliant Code Example

In this noncompliant code example, an assignment expression is the outermost expression in an if statement:

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
if (a = b) {
  /* ... */
}

Although the intent of the code may be to assign b to a and test the value of the result for equality to 0, it is frequently a case of the programmer mistakenly using the assignment operator = instead of the equals operator ==. Consequently, many compilers will warn about this condition, making this coding error detectable by adhering to MSC00-C. Compile cleanly at high warning levels.

Compliant Solution (Unintentional Assignment)

When the assignment of b to a is not intended, the conditional block is now executed when a is equal to b:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if (a == b) {
  /* ... */
}

Compliant Solution (Intentional Assignment)

When the assignment is intended, this compliant solution explicitly uses inequality as the outermost expression while performing the assignment in the inner expression:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if ((a = b) != 0) {
  /* ... */
}

It is less desirable in general, depending on what was intended, because it mixes the assignment in the condition, but it is clear that the programmer intended the assignment to occur.

Noncompliant Code Example

In this noncompliant code example, the expression x = y is used as the controlling expression of the while statement:

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
 do { /* ... */ } while (foo(), x = y);

The same result can be obtained using the for statement, which is specifically designed to evaluate an expression on each iteration of the loop, just before performing the test in its controlling expression:

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
 for (; x; foo(), x = y) { /* ... */ }

Compliant Solution (Unintentional Assignment)

When the assignment of y to x is not intended, the conditional block should be executed only when x is equal to y, as in this compliant solution:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
do { /* ... */ } while (foo(), x == y); 

Compliant Solution (Intentional Assignment)

When the assignment is intended, this compliant solution can be used:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
do { /* ... */ } while (foo(), (x = y) != 0);

Noncompliant Code Example

In this noncompliant example, the expression p = q is used as the controlling expression of the while statement:

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
 do { /* ... */ } while (x = y, p = q);

Compliant Solution

In this compliant solution, the expression x = y is not used as the controlling expression of the while statement:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
do { /* ... */ } while (x = y, p == q); 

Exceptions

EXP45-EX1: Assignment can be used where the result of the assignment is itself an operand to a comparison expression or relational expression. In this compliant example, the expression x = y  is itself an operand to a comparison operation:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if ((x = y) != 0) { /* ... */ } 

EXP45-EX2: Assignment can be used where the expression consists of a single primary expression. The following code is compliant because the expression  x = y is a single primary expression:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if ((x = y)) { /* ... */ } 

The following controlling expression is noncompliant because && is not a comparison or relational operator and the entire expression is not primary:

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
if ((v = w) && flag) { /* ... */ } 

 

When the assignment of v to w is not intended, the following controlling expression can be used to execute the conditional block when v is equal to w:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if ((v == w) && flag) { /* ... */ }; 

When the assignment is intended, the following controlling expression can be used:

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if (((v = w) != 0) && flag) { /* ... */ }; 

EXP45-EX3: Assignment can be used in a function argument or array index. In this compliant solution, the expression x = y is used in a function argument:

 

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
if (foo(x = y)) { /* ... */ } 

Noncompliant Code Example

This noncompliant code example has a typo that results in an assignment rather than a comparison.

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
while (ch == ' ' && ch = '\t' && ch == '\n') {
  /* ... */
}

Many compilers will warn about this condition. This coding error would typically be eliminated by adherence to MSC00-C. Compile cleanly at high warning levels. Although this code compiles, it will cause unexpected behavior to an unsuspecting programmer. If the intent was to verify a string such as a password, user name, or group user ID, the code may produce significant vulnerabilities and require significant debugging.

Compliant Solution (RHS Variable)

When comparisons are made against things other than variables, placing the variable on the right of the comparison operation can prevent a spurious assignment.

In this code example, the constants are placed on the left-hand side of each comparison, ensuring a compiler diagnostic at any warning level. If the programmer were to inadvertently use an assignment operator, the statement would try to assign a ch to a '\t' and become invalid.

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
langc
while (' ' == ch && '\t' = ch && '\n' == ch) {
  /* ... */
}

Thanks to the compiler, the typo will be easily spotted and fixed.

Code Block
bgColor#ccccff
langc
while (' ' == ch && '\t' == ch && '\n' == ch) {
  /* ... */
}

As a result, any mistaken use of the assignment operator that could otherwise create a vulnerability for operations such as string verification will result in a compiler diagnostic regardless of compiler, warning level, or implementation.

Risk Assessment

Errors of omission can result in unintended program flow.

Recommendation

Severity

Likelihood

Remediation Cost

Priority

Level

EXP45-C

Low

Likely

Medium

P6

L2

Automated Detection

Tool

Version

Checker

Description

CodeSonar
Include Page
CodeSonar_V
CodeSonar_V
LANG.STRUCT.CONDASSIGAssignment in Conditional

Compass/ROSE

 

 

Could detect violations of this recommendation by identifying any assignment expression as the top-level expression in an if or while statement

ECLAIR

Include Page
ECLAIR_V
ECLAIR_V

CC2.EXP18

CC2.EXP21

Fully implemented

GCC

Include Page
GCC_V
GCC_V

 

Can detect violations of this recommendation when the -Wall flag is used

Klocwork

Include Page
Klocwork_V
Klocwork_V

ASSIGCOND.GEN
ASSIGCOND.CALL

 

LDRA tool suite

Include Page
LDRA_V
LDRA_V

9 S

 

PRQA QA-C
Include Page
PRQA QA-C_v
PRQA QA-C_v
3314,3326, 3344,3416Partially implemented

Related Vulnerabilities

Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.

Related Guidelines

Bibliography

[Dutta 03]"Best Practices for Programming in C"
[Hatton 1995]Section 2.7.2, "Errors of Omission and Addition"