Comparing a function pointer to a value that is not a null function pointer of the same type will be diagnosed because it typically indicates programmer error and can result in unexpected behavior. Implicit comparisons will be diagnosed, as well.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, the addresses of the POSIX functions getuid
and geteuid
are compared for equality to 0. Because no function address shall be null, the first subexpression will always evaluate to false (0), and the second subexpression always to true (nonzero). Consequently, the entire expression will always evaluate to true, leading to a potential security vulnerability.
/* First the options that are allowed only for root */ if (getuid == 0 || geteuid != 0) { /* ... */ }
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, the function pointers getuid
and geteuid
are compared to 0. This example is from an actual vulnerability (VU#837857) discovered in some versions of the X Window System server. The vulnerability exists because the programmer neglected to provide the open and close parentheses following the geteuid()
function identifier. As a result, the geteuid
token returns the address of the function, which is never equal to 0. Consequently, the or
condition of this if
statement is always true, and access is provided to the protected block for all users. Many compilers issue a warning noting such pointless expressions. Therefore, this coding error is normally detected by adherence to MSC00-C. Compile cleanly at high warning levels.
/* First the options that are allowed only for root */ if (getuid() == 0 || geteuid != 0) { /* ... */ }
Compliant Solution
The solution is to provide the open and close parentheses following the geteuid
token so that the function is properly invoked:
/* First the options that are allowed only for root */ if (getuid() == 0 || geteuid() != 0) { /* ... */ }
Compliant Solution
A function pointer can be compared to a null function pointer of the same type:
/* First the options that are allowed only for root */ if (getuid == (uid_t(*)(void))0 || geteuid != (uid_t(*)(void))0) { /* ... */ }
This code should not be diagnosed by an analyzer.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example, the function pointer do_xyz
is implicitly compared unequal to 0:
int do_xyz(void); int f(void) { /* ... */ if (do_xyz) { return -1; /* Indicate failure */ } /* ... */ return 0; }
Compliant Solution
In this compliant solution, the function do_xyz()
is invoked and the return value is compared to 0:
int do_xyz(void); int f(void) { /* ... */ if (do_xyz()) { return -1; /* Indicate failure */ } /* ... */ return 0; }
Risk Assessment
Errors of omission can result in unintended program flow.
Recommendation | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EXP16-C | Low | Likely | Medium | P6 | L2 |
Automated Detection
Tool | Version | Checker | Description |
---|---|---|---|
2017.07 | BAD_COMPARE | Can detect the specific instance where the address of a function is compared against 0, such as in the case of | |
GCC | 4.3.5 | Can detect violations of this recommendation when the | |
Klocwork | 2024.3 | ||
LDRA tool suite | 9.7.1 | 99 S | Partially implemented |
Parasoft C/C++test | 2023.1 | CERT_C-EXP16-a | Function address should not be compared to zero |
PRQA QA-C | Unable to render {include} The included page could not be found. | 0428, 3004, 3344 | |
PVS-Studio | 7.33 | V516 |
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Related Guidelines
SEI CERT C++ Coding Standard | VOID EXP16-CPP. Avoid conversions using void pointers |
ISO/IEC TR 24772:2013 | Likely incorrect expressions [KOA] |
ISO/IEC TS 17961 | Comparing function addresses to zero [funcaddr] |
MITRE CWE | CWE-480, Use of incorrect operator CWE-482, Comparing instead of assigning |
Bibliography
[Hatton 1995] | Section 2.7.2, "Errors of Omission and Addition" |