From 26908ea281d5b5e6d679bd51be3022a46b2c19af Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Felicity Chapman Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 09:36:10 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Update docs/codeql/codeql-language-guides/using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst Co-authored-by: Steve Guntrip <12534592+stevecat@users.noreply.github.com> --- .../using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/docs/codeql/codeql-language-guides/using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst b/docs/codeql/codeql-language-guides/using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst index 8088d3970be..597ce491463 100644 --- a/docs/codeql/codeql-language-guides/using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst +++ b/docs/codeql/codeql-language-guides/using-flow-labels-for-precise-data-flow-analysis.rst @@ -390,7 +390,7 @@ Some of our standard security queries use flow labels. You can look at their imp to get a feeling for how to use flow labels in practice. In particular, both of the examples mentioned in the section on limitations of basic data flow above -are from standard security queries that use flow labels. The `Prototype-pollutiing merge call +are from standard security queries that use flow labels. The `Prototype-polluting merge call `_ query uses two flow labels to distinguish completely tainted objects from partially tainted objects. The `Uncontrolled data used in path expression `_ query uses four flow labels to track whether a user-controlled