Compound operations on shared variables (consisting of more than one discrete operation) must be performed atomically. Errors can arise from compound operations that need to be perceived atomically but are not \[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\].
Compound assignment expressions include operators {{*=, /=, %=, +=, -=, <<=, >>=, >>>=, ^=, or |=}}. The postfix and prefix increment ({{\+\+}}) and decrement ({{\-\-}}) operations can also be treated as compound expressions.
For atomicity of a grouping of calls to independently atomic methods of the existing Java API, see [CON07-J. Do not assume that a grouping of calls to independently atomic methods is atomic].
The Java Language Specification also permits reads and writes of 64-bit values to be non-atomic though this is not an issue with most modern JVMs (see [CON25-J. Ensure atomicity when reading and writing 64-bit values]).
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (bitwise compound operation)
This noncompliant code example declares a shared {{boolean}} variable {{flag}} and uses an optimization in the {{toggle()}} method to negate the current value of the flag.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class Foo {
private boolean flag = true;
public flag toggle() {
flag ^= true; // same as flag = !flag;
}
}
{code}
However, this code is not thread-safe. Multiple threads may not observe the latest state of the {{flag}} because {{^=}} constitutes a non-atomic operation.
h2. Noncompliant Code Example ({{volatile}} variable)
This noncompliant code example derives from the preceding one but declares the {{flag}} as {{volatile}}.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class Foo {
private volatile boolean flag = true;
public boolean toggle() {
flag ^= true; // same as flag = !flag;
return flag;
}
}
{code}
It is still insecure for multithreaded use because {{volatile}} does not guarantee the visibility of updates to the shared variable {{flag}} when a compound operation is performed.
h2. Compliant Solution (synchronization)
This compliant solution synchronized the {{toggle()}} method to ensure that the {{flag}} is made visible to all the threads.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class Foo {
private volatile boolean flag = true;
public synchronized boolean toggle() {
flag ^= true; // same as flag = !flag;
return flag;
}
}
{code}
h2. Compliant Solution ({{java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean}})
This compliant solution uses the {{java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean}} type to declare the {{flag}}.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class Foo {
private AtomicBoolean flag = new AtomicBoolean(true);
public boolean toggle() {
boolean temp;
do {
temp = flag.get();
} while(!flag.compareAndSet(temp, !temp));
return temp;
}
}
{code}
It ensures that updates to the variable are carried out by using the {{compareAndSet()}} method of the class {{AtomicBoolean}}. All updates are made visible to other threads.
{mc}
// THIS CONTENT IS CURRENTLY HIDDEN
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (bitwise logic)
This class maintains a set of flags, which can be set and cleared independently. They are stored in a single byte field.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class Flags {
public static final byte FLAG_1 = 1
public static final byte FLAG_2 = 2;
public static final byte FLAG_4 = 4;
public static final byte FLAG_8 = 8;
private byte flags = 0;
public void setFlag(byte flag) {
flags |= flag;
}
public void clearFlag(byte flag) {
flags &= ~flag;
}
}
{code}
This class is not thread-safe at all, even though only one value is modified. For instance, suppose Thread 1 calls {{setFlag( FLAG_1)}} while Thread 2 calls {{setFlag( FLAG_2)}}. The following represents one possible execution of the two threads:
||Time||flags=||Thread||Action||
|1|0|_t_~1~|reads the current value of {{flags}}, 0, into a temporary variable|
|2|0|_t_~2~|reads the current value of {{flags}}, (still) 0, into a temporary variable |
|3|0|_t_~1~|sets the 1st byte, creating the value 1|
|4|0|_t_~2~|sets the 2nd byte, creating the value 2|
|5|1| _t_~1~|writes the temporary variable value to {{flags}}|
|6|2| _t_~2~|writes the temporary variable value to {{flags}}|
As a result, the effect of the call by _t_~1~ is not reflected in {{flags}}; the program behaves as if the call was never made.
Furthermore, it is quite likely that if one thread sets a flag, and another thread retrieves the flags value, the second thread will not see the setting from the first thread.
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (volatile)
In this noncompliant code example, the {[flags}} field is {{volatile}}.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class Flags {
public static final byte FLAG_1 = 1
public static final byte FLAG_2 = 2;
public static final byte FLAG_4 = 4;
public static final byte FLAG_8 = 8;
private volatile byte flags = 0;
public void setFlag(byte flag) {
flags |= flag;
}
public void clearFlag(byte flag) {
flags &= ~flag;
}
}
{code}
The {{volatile}} keyword guarantees that any writes to the {{flags}} variable will be seen by any subsequent reads. However, the {{volatile}} keyword does not prevent the exedcution scenario described above. In particular, it does not guarantee that the read of the {{flags}} variable followed by the write of the {{flags}} variable is atomic.
h2. Compliant Solution ({{java.util.concurrent.atomic}} classes)
The {{java.util.concurrent}} utilities can be used to atomically manipulate a shared variable. In this compliant solution, {{flags}} is an {{AtomicInteger}}, allowing composite operations to be performed atomically.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class Flags {
private AtomicInteger flags = new AtomicInteger( 0);
public void setFlag(byte flag) {
while (true) {
int old = flags.get();
int next = old | flag;
if (flags.compareAndSet( old, next)) {
break;
}
}
}
public void clearFlag(byte flag) {
while (true) {
int old = flags.get();
int next = old & ~flag;
if (flags.compareAndSet( old, next)) {
break;
}
}
}
}
{code}
Note that updates to shared atomic variables are visible to other threads.
The {{compareAndSet()}} method takes two arguments, the expected value of a variable when the method is invoked and the updated value. This compliant solution uses this method to atomically set the value of {{flags}} to the updated value if and only if the current value equals the expected value \[[API 06|AA. Java References#API 06]\]. The {{while}} loop ensures that each method persists in trying to set {{flags}} until it succeeds.
h2. Compliant Solution (synchronization)
This compliant solution uses synchronization to protect access to the {{flags}} field. Synchronization provides a way to safely share object state across multiple threads without the need to reason about reorderings, compiler optimizations, and hardware specific behavior.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class Flags {
private byte flags = 0;
private Object lock = new Object();
public void setFlag(byte flag) {
synchronized (lock) {
flags |= flag;
}
}
public void clearFlag(byte flag) {
synchronized (lock) {
flags &= ~flag;
}
}
}
{code}
If code is synchronized correctly, updates to shared variables are instantly made visible to other threads. Synchronization is more expensive than using the optimized {{java.util.concurrent}} utilities and should generally be preferred when it is sufficiently complex to carry out the operation atomically using the utilities. When using synchronization, care must be taken to avoid deadlocks (see [CON12-J. Avoid deadlock by requesting and releasing locks in the same order]).
Constructors and methods can use block synchronization as an alternative to method synchronization. Block synchronization synchronizes a block of code rather than a method, as shown in this compliant solution. Block synchronization can also synchronize on a lock besides the object's intrinsic lock, as is recommended by [CON04-J. Use the private lock object idiom instead of the Class object's intrinsic locking mechanism].
// END OF HIDDEN CONTENT
{mc}
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (increment/decrement)
Prefix and postfix, increment and decrement operations are non-atomic in that the value written depends upon the value initially read from the operand. For example, {{x+\+}} is non-atomic because it is a composite operation consisting of three discrete operations: reading the current value of {{x}}, adding one to it, and writing the new, incremented value back to {{x}}.
This noncompliant code example contains a data race that may result in the {{itemsInInventory}} field failing to account for removed items.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private int itemsInInventory = 100;
public final void removeItem() {
if (itemsInInventory <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Under stocked");
}
itemsInInventory--;
}
}
{code}
For example, if the {{removeItem()}} method is concurrently invoked by two threads, _t_~1~ and _t_~2~, the execution of these threads may be interleaved so that:
||Time||itemsInInventory=||Thread||Action||
|1|100|_t_~1~|reads the current value of {{itemsInInventory}}, 100, into a temporary variable|
|2|100|_t_~2~|reads the current value of {{itemsInInventory}}, (still) 100, into a temporary variable |
|3|100|_t_~1~|decrements the temporary variable to 99|
|4|100|_t_~2~|decrements the temporary variable to 99|
|5|99| _t_~1~|writes the temporary variable value to {{itemsInInventory}}|
|6|99| _t_~2~|writes the temporary variable value to {{itemsInInventory}}|
As a result, the effect of the call by _t_~1~ is not reflected in {{itemsInInventory}}; the program behaves as if the call was never made.
As another example, suppose itemsInInventory currently has the value MIN_INVENTORY + 1. If the {{removeItem()}} method is concurrently invoked by two threads, _t_~1~ and _t_~2~, the execution of these threads may be interleaved so that:
||Time||itemsInInventory=||Thread||Action||
|1|MIN_INVENTORY+1|_t_~1~|checks that the current value of {{itemsInInventory}} is large enough to decrement, which it is|
|2|MIN_INVENTORY+1|_t_~2~|checks that the current value of {{itemsInInventory}} is large enough to decrement, which it is|
|3|MIN_INVENTORY+1|_t_~1~|reads the current value of {{itemsInInventory}}, MIN_INVENTORY+1, into a temporary variable |
|4|MIN_INVENTORY|_t_~1~|decrements the temporary variable to MIN_INVENTORY|
|5|MIN_INVENTORY| _t_~1~|writes the temporary variable value to {{itemsInInventory}}|
|6|MIN_INVENTORY|_t_~2~|reads the current value of {{itemsInInventory}}, MIN_INVENTORY, into a temporary variable |
|7|MIN_INVENTORY-1|_t_~2~|decrements the temporary variable to MIN_INVENTORY-1|
|8|MIN_INVENTORY-1| _t_~2~|writes the temporary variable value to {{itemsInInventory}}|
As a result, both threads decrement {{itemsInInventory}} but the range check on the variable is bypassed, causing the variable to have an invalid value. The decrement operation may even wrap if {{MIN_INVENTORY == Integer.MIN_VALUE}}.
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (volatile)
This noncompliant code example attempts to resolve the problem by declaring {{itemsInInventory}} volatile.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private volatile int itemsInInventory = 100;
public final void removeItem() {
if (itemsInInventory <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("under stocked");
}
itemsInInventory--;
}
}
{code}
Volatile variables are unsuitable when more than one read/write operation needs to be atomic. The use of a volatile variable in this noncompliant code example guarantees that once {{itemsInInventory}} has been updated, the new value is visible to all threads that read the field. However, because the post decrement operator is nonatomic, even when {{volatile}} is used, the interleaving described in the previous noncompliant code example is still possible. Furthermore, the race codnition imposed by range-checking {{itemsInInventory}} before decrementing it is also still possible.
h2. Compliant Solution ({{java.util.concurrent.atomic}} classes)
The {{java.util.concurrent}} utilities can be used to atomically manipulate a shared variable. This compliant solution defines {{intemsInInventory}} as a {{java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicInteger}} variable, allowing composite operations to be performed atomically.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private final AtomicInteger itemsInInventory = new AtomicInteger(100);
public final void removeItem() {
while (true) {
int old = itemsInInventory.get();
if (old <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Under stocked");
}
int next = old - 1; // Decrement
if (itemsInInventory.compareAndSet(old, next)) {
break;
}
} // end while
} // end removeItem()
}
{code}
Note that updates to shared atomic variables are visible to other threads.
The {{compareAndSet()}} method takes two arguments, the expected value of a variable when the method is invoked and the updated value. This compliant solution uses this method to atomically set the value of {{itemsInInventory}} to the updated value if and only if the current value equals the expected value \[[API 06|AA. Java References#API 06]\]. The {{while}} loop ensures that the {{removeItem()}} method succeeds in decrementing the most recent value of {{itemsInInventory}} as long as the inventory count is greater than {{MIN_INVENTORY}}.
h2. Compliant Solution (method synchronization)
Synchronization provides a way to safely share object state across multiple threads without the need to reason about reorderings, compiler optimizations, and hardware specific behavior.
This compliant solution uses method synchronization to synchronize access to {{itemsInInventory}}. Consequently, access to {{itemsInInventory}} is mutually exclusive and its state consistent across all threads.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private int itemsInInventory = 100;
public final synchronized void removeItem() {
if (itemsInInventory <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Under stocked");
}
itemsInInventory--;
}
}
{code}
If code is synchronized correctly, updates to shared variables are instantly made visible to other threads. Synchronization is more expensive than using the optimized {{java.util.concurrent}} utilities and should generally be preferred when it is sufficiently complex to carry out the operation atomically using the utilities. When using synchronization, care must be taken to avoid deadlocks (see [CON12-J. Avoid deadlock by requesting and releasing locks in the same order]).
h2. Compliant Solution (block synchronization)
Constructors and methods can use block synchronization as an alternative to method synchronization. Block synchronization synchronizes a block of code rather than a method, as shown in this compliant solution.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private int itemsInInventory = 100;
private final Object lock = new Object();
public final void removeItem() {
synchronized(lock) {
if (itemsInInventory <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Under stocked");
}
itemsInInventory--;
}
}
}
{code}
Block synchronization is preferable over method synchronization because it enables reduction of the duration for which the lock is held. This is because statements that do not require synchronization can be safely moved out of the synchronized block. This compliant solution requires all statements to be synchronized and consequently, is comparable to the previous compliant solution with respect to performance.
Block synchronization when used in conjunction with a {{private}} internal lock object also protects against denial of service attacks. Block synchronization does not require synchronizing on an internal private lock object instead of the intrinsic lock of the class's object ({{this}} reference). However, it is more secure to synchronize on an internal private lock object instead of a more accessible lock object. See [CON04-J. Use the private lock object idiom instead of the Class object's intrinsic locking mechanism] for more information.
h2. Compliant Solution ({{ReentrantLock}})
This compliant solution uses a {{java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantLock}} to atomically perform the post-decrement operation.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
class InventoryManager {
private static final int MIN_INVENTORY = 3;
private int itemsInInventory = 100;
private final Lock lock = new ReentrantLock();
public final void removeItem() {
if (lock.tryLock()) {
try {
if (itemsInInventory <= MIN_INVENTORY) {
throw new IllegalStateException("Under stocked");
}
itemsInInventory--;
} finally {
lock.unlock();
}
}
} // end removeItem()
}
{code}
Code that uses this lock behaves similar to synchronized code that uses the traditional monitor lock. {{ReentrantLock}} provides several other capabilities, for instance, the {{tryLock()}} method does not block waiting if another thread is already holding the lock. The class {{java.util.concurrent.locks.ReentrantReadWriteLock}} can be used when some thread requires a lock to write information while other threads require the lock to concurrently read the information.
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (addition, volatile fields)
In this noncompliant code example, the two fields {{a}} and {{b}} may be set by multiple threads, using the {{setValues()}} method.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
private volatile int a;
private volatile int b;
public int getSum() throws ArithmeticException {
// Check for integer overflow
if( b > 0 ? a > Integer.MAX_VALUE - b : a < Integer.MIN_VALUE - b ) {
throw new ArithmeticException("Not in range");
}
return a + b;
}
public void setValues(int a, int b) {
this.a = a;
this.b = b;
}
{code}
The {{getSum()}} method may return a different sum every time it is invoked from different threads. For instance, if {{a}} and {{b}} currently have the value 0, and one thread calls {{getSum()}} while another calls {{setValues(1, 1)}}, then {{getSum()}} might return 0, 1, or 2. Of these, the value 1 is unacceptable; it is returned when the first thread reads {{a}} and {{b}}, after the second thread has set the value of {{a}} but before it has set the value of {{b}}.
h2. Noncompliant Code Example (addition, atomic integer fields)
The issues described in the previous noncompliant code example can also arise when the volatile variables {{a}} and {{b}} are replaced with atomic integers.
{code:bgColor=#FFcccc}
private final AtomicInteger a = new AtomicInteger();
private final AtomicInteger b = new AtomicInteger();
public int getSum() throws ArithmeticException {
// Check for integer overflow
if( b.get() > 0 ? a.get() > Integer.MAX_VALUE - b.get() : a.get() < Integer.MIN_VALUE - b.get() ) {
throw new ArithmeticException("Not in range");
}
return a.get() + b.get(); // or, return a.getAndAdd(b.get());
}
public void setValues(int a, int b) {
this.a.set(a);
this.b.set(b);
}
{code}
For example, when a thread is executing {{setValues()}} another may invoke {{getSum()}} and retrieve an incorrect result. Furthermore, in the absence of synchronization, there are data races in the check for integer overflow.
h2. Compliant Solution (addition)
This compliant solution synchronizes the {{setValues()}} method so that the entire operation is atomic.
{code:bgColor=#ccccff}
private int a;
private int b;
public synchronized int getSum() throws ArithmeticException {
// Check for integer overflow
if( b > 0 ? a > Integer.MAX_VALUE - b : a < Integer.MIN_VALUE - b ) {
throw new ArithmeticException("Not in range");
}
return a + b;
}
public synchronized void setValues(int a, int b) {
this.a = a;
this.b = b;
}
{code}
Unlike the noncompliant code example, if {{a}} and {{b}} currently have the value 0, and one thread calls {{getSum()}} while another calls {{setValues(1, 1)}}, {{getSum()}} may return return 0, or 2, depending on which thread obtains the intrinsic lock first. The locking guarantees that {{getSum()}} will never return the unacceptable value 1.
h2. Risk Assessment
If operations on shared variables are not atomic, unexpected results may be produced. For example, there can be inadvertent information disclosure as one user may be able to receive information about other users.
|| Rule || Severity || Likelihood || Remediation Cost || Priority || Level ||
| CON01\- J | medium | probable | medium | {color:#cc9900}{*}P8{*}{color} | {color:#cc9900}{*}L2{*}{color} |
h3. Automated Detection
TODO
h3. Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the [CERT website|https://www.kb.cert.org/vulnotes/bymetric?searchview&query=FIELD+KEYWORDS+contains+CON30-J].
h2. References
\[[API 06|AA. Java References#API 06]\] Class AtomicInteger
\[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\] [Chapter 17, Threads and Locks|http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/memory.html], section 17.4.5 Happens-before Order, section 17.4.3 Programs and Program Order, section 17.4.8 Executions and Causality Requirements
\[[Tutorials 08|AA. Java References#Tutorials 08]\] [Java Concurrency Tutorial|http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/essential/concurrency/index.html]
\[[Lea 00|AA. Java References#Lea 00]\] Sections, 2.2.7 The Java Memory Model, 2.2.5 Deadlock, 2.1.1.1 Objects and locks
\[[Bloch 08|AA. Java References#Bloch 08]\] Item 66: Synchronize access to shared mutable data
\[[Daconta 03|AA. Java References#Daconta 03]\] Item 31: Instance Variables in Servlets
\[[JavaThreads 04|AA. Java References#JavaThreads 04]\] Section 5.2 Atomic Variables
\[[Goetz 06|AA. Java References#Goetz 06]\] 2.3. "Locking"
\[[MITRE 09|AA. Java References#MITRE 09]\] [CWE ID 667|http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/667.html] "Insufficient Locking", [CWE ID 413|http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/413.html] "Insufficient Resource Locking", [CWE ID 366|http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/366.html] "Race Condition within a Thread", [CWE ID 567|http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/567.html] "Unsynchronized Access to Shared Data"
----
[!The CERT Sun Microsystems Secure Coding Standard for Java^button_arrow_left.png!|11. Concurrency (CON)] [!The CERT Sun Microsystems Secure Coding Standard for Java^button_arrow_up.png!|11. Concurrency (CON)] [!The CERT Sun Microsystems Secure Coding Standard for Java^button_arrow_right.png!|CON02-J. Always synchronize on the appropriate object]
|
