Reclaiming resources when exceptions are thrown is important. An exception being thrown may result in cleanup code being bypassed or an object being left in a partially initialized state. Such a partially - initialized object would violate basic exception safety, as described in ERR56-CPP. Guarantee exception safety. It is preferable that resources be reclaimed automatically, using the RAII design pattern [Stroustrup 2001], when objects go out of scope. This technique avoids the need to write complex cleanup code when allocating resources.
However, constructors do not offer the same protection. Because a constructor is involved in allocating resources, it does not automatically free any resources it allocates if it terminates prematurely. The C++ Standard, [except.ctor], paragraph 2 [ISO/IEC 14882-2014], states the following:
An object of any storage duration whose initialization or destruction is terminated by an exception will have destructors executed for all of its fully constructed subobjects (excluding the variant members of a union-like class), that is, for subobjects for which the principal constructor (12.6.2) has completed execution and the destructor has not yet begun execution. Similarly, if the non-delegating constructor for an object has completed execution and a delegating constructor for that object exits with an exception, the object’s destructor will be invoked. If the object was allocated in a new-expression, the matching deallocation function (3.7.4.2, 5.3.4, 12.5), if any, is called to free the storage occupied by the object.
It is generally recommended that constructors that cannot complete their job should throw exceptions rather than exit normally and leave their object in an incomplete state [Cline 092009].
Resources must not be leaked as a result of throwing an exception, including during the construction of an object.
This rule is a subset of MEM51-CPP. Properly deallocate dynamically allocated resources, as all failures to deallocate resources violate that rule.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, pst
is not properly released when process_item
throws an exception, causing a resource leak:.
Code Block | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
#include <new> struct SomeType { SomeType() noexcept; // Performs nontrivial initialization. ~SomeType(); // Performs nontrivial finalization. void process_item() noexcept(false); }; void f() { SomeType *pst = new (std::nothrow) SomeType(); if (!pst) { // Handle error return; } try { pst->process_item(); } catch (...) { // Process error, but do not recover from it; rethrow. throw; } delete pst; } |
...
In this compliant solution, the exception handler frees pst
by calling delete
:.
Code Block | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
#include <new> struct SomeType { SomeType() noexcept; // Performs nontrivial initialization. ~SomeType(); // Performs nontrivial finalization. void process_item() noexcept(false); }; void f() { SomeType *pst = new (std::nothrow) SomeType(); if (!pst) { // Handle error return; } try { pst->process_item(); } catch (...) { // Process error, but do not recover from it; rethrow. delete pst; throw; } delete pst; } |
...
This compliant solution mitigates the potential failures by releasing a
and b
if an exception is thrown during their allocation or during init()
:.
Code Block | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
struct A {/* ... */}; struct B {/* ... */}; class C { A *a; B *b; protected: void init() noexcept(false); public: C() : a(nullptr), b(nullptr) { try { a = new A(); b = new B(); init(); } catch (...) { delete a; delete b; throw; } } }; |
...
Memory and other resource leaks will eventually cause a program to crash. If an attacker can provoke repeated resource leaks by forcing an exception to be thrown through the submission of suitably crafted data, then the attacker can mount a denial-of-service attack.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ERR57-CPP | Low | Probable | High | P2 | L3 |
Automated Detection
Tool | Version | Checker | Description | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CodeSonar |
| ALLOC.LEAK | Leak | ||||||
Helix QAC |
| DF4756, DF4757, DF4758 | |||||||
Klocwork |
| CL.MLK | |||||||
LDRA tool suite |
| 50 D | Partially implemented | ||||||
Parasoft C/C++test |
| CERT_CPP-ERR57-a | Ensure resources are freed | |||||||
Polyspace Bug Finder |
| CERT C++: ERR57-CPP | Checks for:
|
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Related Guidelines
SEI CERT C++ Coding Standard | MEM51-CPP. Properly deallocate dynamically allocated resources |
Bibliography
[Cline |
2009] | Question 17.2, I'm still not convinced: A 4-line code snippet shows that return-codes aren't any worse than exceptions; |
[ISO/IEC 14882-2014] | Subclause 15.2, "Constructors and Destructors" |
[Meyers |
1996] | Item 9, "Use Destructors to Prevent Resource Leaks" |
[Stroustrup 2001] | "Exception-Safe Implementation Techniques" |
...
...