Versions Compared

Key

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

...

There is no defensive copying of the mutable components or sub-objects (Date object) in this noncompliant code example. An attacker may be able to create an instance of MutableSer with a mutated so that all invariants hold when validation is carried out and later, mutate the value of the date sub-object to violate the class's contract. Any code that depends on the immutability of the sub-object is vulnerable.

Code Block
bgColor#FFcccc
class MutableSer implements Serializable {
  private Date date = null; // Mutable component
  
  public MutableSer(Date d){
    date = new Date(d.getTime()); // Constructor performs defensive copying
  }

  private void readObject(ObjectInputStream ois) throws IOException, ClassNotFoundException {
    ois.defaultReadObject();
    // Perform validation if necessary
  }
}

...

Wiki Markup
There is no need to copy immutable sub-objects. Also, avoid using the sub-object's {{clone()}} method because it can be overridden when the sub-object's class is non-final. Moreover, it produces only a shallow copy. The sub-objects ({{date}}) themselves must be non-final so that defensive copying can occur. It is also inadvisable to use the {{writeUnshared()}} and {{readUnshared()}} methods as an alternative \[[Bloch 08|AA. Java References#Bloch 08]\].

...