This removes all uses of `Declaration.getQualifiedName` that I think can
be removed without changing any behaviour. The following uses in the
LGTM default suite remain:
* `cpp/ql/src/Security/CWE/CWE-121/UnterminatedVarargsCall.ql` (in `select`).
* `cpp/ql/src/semmle/code/cpp/dataflow/internal/DataFlowDispatch.qll` (needs template args).
* `cpp/ql/src/semmle/code/cpp/security/FunctionWithWrappers.qll` (used for alert messages).
This query uses data flow for nullness analysis, which is always going
to be a large overapproximation. The overapproximation became too big
for one of the test cases after the recent change to make data flow go
across assignment by reference.
To make this query more conservative, it will now only report that the
`pDacl` argument can be null if there isn't also evidence that it can be
non-null.
The main source of slowness in `BrokenCryptoAlgorithm.ql` was that the
regexp on function (macro) names was evaluated once per call
(invocation) instead of once per name. Factoring out separate predicates
for the problematic functions (macros) fixes this.
On https://github.com/ericniebler/range-v3, this change reduces the run
time of the two slowest predicates from
BrokenCryptoAlgorithm::InsecureMacroSpec#class#f .... 35.1s
BrokenCryptoAlgorithm::InsecureFunctionCall#class#f . 12.8s
to
BrokenCryptoAlgorithm::getAnInsecureFunction#f . 1.2s
BrokenCryptoAlgorithm::getAnInsecureMacro#f .... 12ms
This query is only appropriate for setuid programs. Since such programs
are at most 0.1% of all code we analyse, I would say this query has a
precision of at most 0.1%.
The `nullValue` predicate performs a slow custom data-flow analysis to
find possible null values. It's so slow that it timed out after 1200s on
Wireshark.
In `UnsafeCreateProcessCall.ql`, the values found with `nullValue` were
used as sources in another data-flow analysis. By using the `NullValue`
class as sink instead of `nullValue`, we avoid the slow-down of doing
data flow twice. The `NullValue` class is essentially the base case of
`nullValue`. Confusing names, yes.
