Files
codeql/python/ql/test/experimental/dataflow/TestUtil/NormalDataflowTest.qll
Rasmus Wriedt Larsen 5ee755db09 Python: Require MISSING: flow annotations for normal data-flow tests
I had to rewrite the SINK1-SINK7 definitions, since this new requirement
complained that we had to add this `MISSING: flow` annotation :D

Doing this implementation also revealed that there was a bug, since I
did not compare files when checking for these `MISSING:` annotations. So
fixed that up in the implementation for inline taint tests as well.

(extra whitespace in argumentPassing.py to avoid changing line numbers
for other tests)
2022-02-01 17:46:53 +01:00

38 lines
1.4 KiB
Plaintext

import python
import experimental.dataflow.TestUtil.FlowTest
import experimental.dataflow.testConfig
private import semmle.python.dataflow.new.internal.PrintNode
class DataFlowTest extends FlowTest {
DataFlowTest() { this = "DataFlowTest" }
override string flowTag() { result = "flow" }
override predicate relevantFlow(DataFlow::Node source, DataFlow::Node sink) {
exists(TestConfiguration cfg | cfg.hasFlow(source, sink))
}
override predicate hasActualResult(Location location, string element, string tag, string value) {
super.hasActualResult(location, element, tag, value)
}
}
query predicate missingAnnotationOnSINK(Location location, string error, string element) {
error = "ERROR, you should add `# $ MISSING: flow` annotation" and
exists(DataFlow::Node sink |
exists(DataFlow::CallCfgNode call |
// note: we only care about `SINK` and not `SINK_F`, so we have to reconstruct manually.
call.getFunction().asCfgNode().(NameNode).getId() = "SINK" and
(sink = call.getArg(_) or sink = call.getArgByName(_))
) and
location = sink.getLocation() and
element = prettyExpr(sink.asExpr()) and
not any(TestConfiguration config).hasFlow(_, sink) and
not exists(FalseNegativeExpectation missingResult |
missingResult.getTag() = "flow" and
missingResult.getLocation().getFile() = location.getFile() and
missingResult.getLocation().getStartLine() = location.getStartLine()
)
)
}