Do not use the assignment operator in the contexts listed in the following table because doing so typically indicates programmer error and can result in unexpected behavior.
Operator | Context |
---|
if | Controlling expression |
while | Controlling expression |
do ... while | Controlling expression |
for | Second operand |
?: | First operand |
?: | Second or third operands, where the ternary expression is used in any of these contexts |
&& | Either operand |
|| | either operand |
, | Second operand, when the comma expression is used in any of these contexts |
Performing assignment statements in other contexts do not violate this rule. However, they may violate other rules, such as EXP30-C. Do not depend on the order of evaluation for side effects.
Noncompliant Code Example
...
Code Block |
---|
|
do { /* ... */ } while (foo(), x = y); |
The same result can be obtained using the for
statement, which is specifically designed to evaluate an expression on each iteration of the loop, just before performing the test in its controlling expression:
Code Block |
---|
|
for (; x; foo(), x = y) { /* ... */ } |
Compliant Solution (Unintentional Assignment)
...
Code Block |
---|
|
do { /* ... */ } while (foo(), (x = y) != 0);
|
Compliant Solution (for
statement)
The same result can be obtained using the for
statement, which is specifically designed to evaluate an expression on each iteration of the loop, just before performing the test in its controlling expression. Remember that its controlling expression is the second operand, where the assignment occurs in its third operand:
Code Block |
---|
|
for (; x; foo(), x = y) { /* ... */ } |
Noncompliant Code Example
...
This noncompliant code example has a typo that results in an assignment rather than a comparison.
Code Block |
---|
|
while (ch = '\t' &&|| ch == ' ' &&|| ch == '\n') {
/* ... */
}
|
Many compilers will warn about this condition. This coding error would typically be eliminated by adherence to MSC00-C. Compile cleanly at high warning levels. Although this code compiles, it will cause unexpected behavior to an unsuspecting programmer. If the intent was to verify a string such as a password, user name, or group user ID, the code may produce significant vulnerabilities and require significant debugging.
When comparisons are made between a variable and a literal or const-qualified variable, placing the variable on the right of the comparison operation can prevent a spurious assignment.
In this code example, the literals are placed on the left-hand side of each comparison. If the programmer were to inadvertently use an assignment operator, the statement would assign ch
to '\t'
, which is invalid and produces a diagnostic message.
Code Block |
---|
|
while ('\t' = ch &&|| ' ' == ch &&|| '\n' == ch) {
/* ... */
} |
Due to the diagnostic, the typo will be easily spotted and fixed.
Code Block |
---|
|
while ('\t' == ch &&|| ' ' == ch &&|| '\n' == ch) {
/* ... */
} |
As a result, any mistaken use of the assignment operator that could otherwise create a vulnerability for operations such as string verification will result in a compiler diagnostic regardless of compiler, warning level, or implementation.
EXP45-C-EX1: Assignment can be used where the result of the assignment is itself an operand to a comparison expression or relational expression. In this compliant example, the expression x = y
is itself an operand to a comparison operation:
Code Block |
---|
|
if ((x = y) != 0) { /* ... */ } |
EXP45-C-EX2: Assignment can be used where the expression consists of a single primary expression. The following code is compliant because the expression x = y
is a single primary expression:
Code Block |
---|
|
if ((x = y)) { /* ... */ } |
The following controlling expression is noncompliant because &&
is not a comparison or relational operator and the entire expression is not primary:
Code Block |
---|
|
if ((v = w) && flag) { /* ... */ } |
When the assignment of v
to w
is not intended, the following controlling expression can be used to execute the conditional block when v
is equal to w
:
Code Block |
---|
|
if ((v == w) && flag) { /* ... */ }; |
When the assignment is intended, the following controlling expression can be used:
Code Block |
---|
|
if (((v = w) != 0) && flag) { /* ... */ }; |
EXP45-C-EX3: Assignment can be used in a function argument or array index. In this compliant solution, the expression x = y
is used in a function argument:
Code Block |
---|
|
if (foo(x = y)) { /* ... */ } |
Errors of omission can result in unintended program flow.
Recommendation | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|
EXP45-C | Low | Likely | Medium | P6 | L2 |
Automated Detection
| Supported, but no explicit checker | CertC-EXP45 |
|
Clang | | -Wparentheses | Can detect some instances of this rule, but does not detect all |
CodeSonar | | LANG.STRUCT.CONDASSIG LANG.STRUCT.SE.COND LANG.STRUCT.USEASSIGN | Assignment in conditional Condition contains side effects Assignment result in expression |
Compass/ROSE |
|
|
| Could detect violations of this recommendation by identifying any assignment expression as the top-level expression in an if or while statement |
Cppcheck Premium | Include Page |
---|
| Cppcheck Premium_V |
---|
| Cppcheck Premium_V |
---|
|
| premium-cert-exp45-c | Partially implemented |
ECLAIR | | CC2.EXP18 CC2.EXP21 | Fully implemented |
GCC | |
|
| Can detect violations of this recommendation when the -Wall flag is used |
Helix QAC | | C3314, C3326, C3344, C3416 C++4071, C++4074 |
|
Klocwork | | ASSIGCOND.CALL ASSIGCOND.GEN MISRA.ASSIGN.COND |
| 9.5 | BD-PB-CC | | | CERT_C-EXP45-b CERT_C-EXP45-d | Assignment operators shall not be used in conditions without brackets Assignment operators shall not be used in expressions that yield a Boolean value |
PC-lint Plus | Include Page |
---|
| PC-lint Plus_V |
---|
| PC-lint Plus_V |
---|
|
| 720 | Partially supported: reports Boolean test of unparenthesized assignment |
Polyspace Bug Finder | |
R2016a | Invalid use of = (assignment) operator |
Assignment in control statement | PRQA QA-CPRQA QACvPRQA QACv3314 3326, 3344, 3416 V633, V699 |
|
RuleChecker | Include Page |
---|
| RuleChecker_V |
---|
| RuleChecker_V |
---|
|
| assignment-conditional | Fully checked |
Partially implemented | PRQA QA-C++ | 4.2 | 4071, 4074 | Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Related Guidelines
Key here (explains table format and definitions)
Taxonomy | Taxonomy item | Relationship |
---|
CERT C |
SEI CERT C++ Coding StandardMITRE CWEPrior to 2018-01-12: CERT: Unspecified Relationship |
CWE 2.11 | CWE-480, Use of Incorrect Operator | 2017-07-05: CERT: Rule subset of CWE |
CWE 2.11 | CWE-481 | 2017-07-05: CERT: Rule subset of CWE |
CERT-CWE Mapping Notes
Key here for mapping notes
CWE-480 and EXP45-C
Intersection( EXP45-C, EXP46-C) = Ø
CWE-480 = Union( EXP45-C, list) where list =
- Usage of incorrect operator besides s/=/==/
CWE-569 and EXP45-C
CWE-480 = Subset( CWE-569)
Bibliography
[Dutta 03] | "Best Practices for Programming in C" |
[Hatton 1995] | Section 2.7.2, "Errors of Omission and Addition" |
...
...
Image Modified Image Modified Image Modified