The Java Language Specification (JLS) allows 64-bit long
and double
values to be treated as two 32-bit values. For example, a 64-bit write operation may could be performed as two separate 32-bit operations.
According to the Java Language Specification \[[ JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\], section 17.7 , §17.7, "Non-atomic Atomic Treatment of {{ Wiki Markup double
}} and {{long
}}": [JLS 2015]:
... this behavior is implementation specific; Java virtual machines are free to perform writes to
long
anddouble
values atomically or in two parts. For the purposes of the Java programming language memory model, a single write to a non-volatilelong
ordouble
value is treated as two separate writes: one to each 32-bit half. This can result in a situation where a thread sees the first 32 bits of a 64-bit value from one write, and the second 32 bits from another write....
Some implementations may find it convenient to divide a single write action on a 64-bit
long
ordouble
value into two write actions on adjacent 32-bit values. For efficiency's sake, this behavior is implementation-specific; an implementation of the Java Virtual Machine is free to perform writes tolong
anddouble
values atomically or in two parts.
This behavior can result in reading indeterminate values being read in code that is required to be thread-safe. Consequently, multithreaded programs must ensure atomicity when reading or writing 64-bit values.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, if one thread repeatedly calls the method oneassignValue()
, method and another thread repeatedly calls the method twoprintLong()
method, then method twothe printLong()
method could occasionally print a value of i
that is neither zero nor the value of the j
argument j
. :
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
class LongContainer { private static long i = 0; static void oneassignValue(long j) { i = j; } static void twoprintLong() { System.out.println("i = " + i); } } |
A similar problem may can occur if when i
is declared as a double
.
Compliant Solution (
...
Volatile)
This compliant solution declares i
as volatile. Writes and reads of volatile long
and double
volatile values are always atomic.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
class LongContainer { private static volatile long i = 0; static void oneassignValue(long j) { i = j; } static void twoprintLong() { System.out.println("i = " + i); } } |
It is important to ensure that the argument to method onethe assignValue()
method is obtained from a volatile variable or obtained as a the result of explicitly passing an integer valueatomic read. Otherwise, a read of the variable argument may can itself expose a vulnerability.
Semantics The semantics of volatile
do not explicitly exclude any guarantee of the atomicity of complex compound operations that involve read-modify-write sequences such as incrementing a value . See CON01(see VNA02-J. Ensure that compound operations on shared variables are atomic for more information).
Exceptions
CON25VNA05-J-EX1EX0: If all reads and writes of 64-bit long
and double
values occur within a synchronized region, the atomicity of the read/write is guaranteed. This requires that no unsynchronized both that the value is exposed only through synchronized methods in the class expose the value and that the value is inaccessible from other code (whether directly or indirectly) from other code. (CON01. For more information, see VNA02-J. Ensure that compound operations on shared variables are atomic) .
CON25VNA05-J-EX2: Systems EX1: This rule can be ignored for platforms that guarantee that 64-bit long
and double
values are read and written as atomic operations may safely ignore this guideline. Note, however, that such guarantees are not portable across different platforms.
Risk Assessment
Failure to ensure the atomicity of operations involving 64-bit values in multi-threaded multithreaded applications can result in reading and writing indeterminate values. Many JVMs However, many Java Virtual Machines read and write 64-bit values atomically , even though the specification does not require them to.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON25VNA05-J | low Low | unlikely Unlikely | medium Medium | P2 | L3 |
Automated Detection
TODO
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation Some static analysis tools are capable of detecting violations of this rule on the CERT website.
References
Wiki Markup |
---|
\[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\] 17.7 Non-atomic Treatment of double and long
\[[Goetz 06|AA. Java References#Goetz 06]\] 3.1.2. Nonatomic 64-bit Operations
\[[Goetz 04|AA. Java References#Goetz 04]\] Brian Goetz. Java theory and practice: Going atomic. November 2004. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp11234/
\[[MITRE 09|AA. Java References#MITRE 09]\] [CWE ID 667|http://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/667.html] "Insufficient Locking" |
.
Tool | Version | Checker | Description | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ThreadSafe |
| CCE_SL_INCONSISTENT | Implemented |
Related Guidelines
Bibliography
Section 3.1.2, "Non-atomic 64-Bit Operations" | |
| |
[JLS 2015] |
...
CON07-J. Do not assume that a grouping of calls to independently atomic methods is atomic 11. Concurrency (CON) CON03-J. Do not use background threads during class initialization