The {{java.util.Collections}} interface's documentation \[[API 06|AA. Java References#API 06]\] warns about the consequences of synchronizing on any view over a collection object, rather than synchronizing on the collection object itself.The Java Tutorials, Wrapper Implementations [Java Tutorials], warns about the consequences of failing to synchronize on an accessible collection object when iterating over its view: Wiki Markup
It is imperative that the user manually synchronize on the returned map
Map
when iterating over any of its collection views... Failure to followCollection
views rather than synchronizing on theCollection
view itself.
Disregarding this advice may result in
...
nondeterministic behavior.
Synchronize on the original Collection
object when using synchronization wrappers. This synchronization is necessary to enforce atomicity (CON07-J. Do not assume that a grouping of calls to independently atomic methods is atomic).
This also applies to java.util.Map
objects, even though Maps are technically not Collections.
Noncompliant Code Example (collection view)
Any class that uses a collection view rather than the backing collection as the lock object may end up with two distinct locking strategies. When the backing collection is accessible to multiple threads, the class that locked on the collection view has violated the thread-safety properties and is unsafe. Consequently, programs that both require synchronization while iterating over collection views and have accessible backing collections must synchronize on the backing collection; synchronization on the view is a violation of this rule.
Noncompliant Code Example (Collection View)
This noncompliant code example creates a HashMap
object and two view objects: a synchronized view of an empty HashMap
encapsulated by the mapView
field and a set view of the map's keys encapsulated by the setView
field. This example synchronizes on setView
[Java Tutorials This noncompliant code example incorrectly synchronizes on the {{set}} view of the synchronized map ({{map}}) instead of the collection object \[[Tutorials 08|AA. Java References#Tutorials 08]\]. Wiki Markup
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
// map has package-private accessibility final Map<Integer, String> mapmapView = Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap<Integer, String>()); private final Set<Integer> setsetView = mapmapView.keySet(); public Map<Integer, String> getMap() { return mapView; } public void doSomething() { synchronized (setsetView) { // Incorrectly synchronizes on setsetView for (Integer k : setsetView) { // ... } } } |
In this example, HashMap
provides the backing collection for the synchronized map represented by mapView
, which provides the backing collection for setView
, as shown in the following figure.
The HashMap
object is inaccessible, but mapView
is accessible via the public getMap()
method. Because the synchronized
statement uses the intrinsic lock of setView
rather than of mapView
, another thread can modify the synchronized map and invalidate the k
iterator.
Compliant Solution (
...
Collection Lock Object)
This compliant solution synchronizes on the original Collection
object map
instead of the Collection
view set
. mapView
field rather than on the setView
field:
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
// map has package-private accessibility final Map<Integer, String> mapmapView = Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap<Integer, String>()); private final Set<Integer> setsetView = mapmapView.keySet(); public Map<Integer, String> getMap() { return mapView; } public void doSomething() { synchronized (mapmapView) { // Synchronize on map, rather notthan set for (Integer k : setsetView) { // ... } } } |
This code is compliant because the map's underlying structure cannot be changed during the iteration.
Risk Assessment
Synchronizing on a collection view instead of the collection object may can cause non-deterministic nondeterministic behavior.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|
LCK04-J |
Low |
Probable |
Medium |
P4 |
L3 |
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
References
...
Automated Detection
Some static analysis tools are capable of detecting violations of this rule.
Tool | Version | Checker | Description | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Parasoft Jtest |
| CERT.LCK04.SOBC | Do not synchronize on a collection view if the backing collection is accessible | ||||||
ThreadSafe |
| CCE_CC_SYNC_ON_VIEW | Implemented |
Bibliography
Issue Tracking
Tasklist | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
||Completed||Priority||Locked||CreatedDate||CompletedDate||Assignee||Name|| |F|M|F|12694529797381270825291208| |dmohindr| |The title could do away with "still"| suggested => "HashMap is not accessible, but the Map view is. Because the set view is synchronized instead of the map view, another thread can modify the contents of map and invalidate the k iterator."| |
...
VOID CON00-J. Synchronize access to shared mutable variables 11. Concurrency (CON) CON03-J. Do not use background threads during class initialization