Files
codeql/python/ql/src/Statements/SideEffectInAssert.ql
yoff 5b9803e03c Python: switch dataflow library to new (shared) CFG + SSA
Flips the Python dataflow trunk from the legacy CFG (semmle/python/Flow.qll)
and legacy ESSA SSA (semmle/python/essa/*) to the new shared CFG facade
(semmle.python.controlflow.internal.Cfg) and the new SSA adapter
(semmle.python.dataflow.new.internal.SsaImpl), both introduced
additively in the preceding PRs in this stack.

This is the trunk-flip equivalent of the original draft PR #21894 (kept
around as documentation), rebased on top of the four preparatory PRs:

  P1: Remove AstNode.getAFlowNode() and rewrite callers (#21919).
  P2: Qualify Flow.qll's AST references with Py:: prefix (#21920).
  P3: Add new shared-CFG-backed control flow graph (#21921).
  P4: Add new shared-SSA-backed SSA adapter (#21923).

The Python dataflow library (semmle/python/dataflow/new/) now imports
the new CFG facade and SSA adapter. All CFG-typed predicates
(ControlFlowNode, CallNode, BasicBlock, NameNode, AttrNode, ...) are
qualified with the Cfg:: prefix; SSA references switch from
EssaVariable/EssaDefinition to SsaImpl::Definition/SourceVariable.

GuardNode is redesigned to use the new CFG's outcome-node model
(isAfterTrue / isAfterFalse) instead of the legacy ConditionBlock +
flipped indirection. Only BarrierGuard<...> is preserved as public
API.

Framework files (Bottle, FastApi, Django, Tornado, Pyramid, Stdlib,
...) are updated to take CFG nodes from the new facade.

A handful of dataflow consistency tweaks for the new CFG:
- Augmented-assignment targets are treated as both load and store.
- 'from X import *' produces uncertain SSA writes for unknown names.
- CFG nodes are canonicalised so dataflow does not see equivalent
  pre/post-order pairs as distinct nodes.

Two AST tweaks for the new CFG:
- AstNodeImpl: omit PEP 695 type-parameter names from
  FunctionDefExpr / ClassDefExpr children.
- ImportResolution: drop the legacy essa import.

Test churn (~175 files): reblessed library- and query-test .expected
files reflect slightly different CFG granularity, different toString
output, and a handful of true alert deltas in security queries.

Verification: all 367 lib + src + consistency-queries compile clean.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-06-05 08:04:01 +00:00

51 lines
1.5 KiB
Plaintext

/**
* @name An assert statement has a side-effect
* @description Side-effects in assert statements result in differences between normal
* and optimized behavior.
* @kind problem
* @tags quality
* reliability
* correctness
* @problem.severity error
* @sub-severity low
* @precision high
* @id py/side-effect-in-assert
*/
import python
private import semmle.python.ApiGraphs
private import semmle.python.controlflow.internal.Cfg as Cfg
predicate func_with_side_effects(Expr e) {
exists(string name | name = e.(Attribute).getName() or name = e.(Name).getId() |
name in [
"print", "write", "append", "pop", "remove", "discard", "delete", "close", "open", "exit"
]
)
}
predicate call_with_side_effect(Call e) {
exists(Cfg::ControlFlowNode eCfg | eCfg.getNode() = e |
eCfg =
API::moduleImport("subprocess")
.getMember(["call", "check_call", "check_output"])
.getACall()
.asCfgNode()
)
}
predicate probable_side_effect(Expr e) {
// Only consider explicit yields, not artificial ones in comprehensions
e instanceof Yield and not exists(Comp c | c.contains(e))
or
e instanceof YieldFrom
or
e instanceof Call and func_with_side_effects(e.(Call).getFunc())
or
e instanceof Call and call_with_side_effect(e)
}
from Assert a, Expr e
where probable_side_effect(e) and a.contains(e)
select a, "This 'assert' statement contains an $@ which may have side effects.", e, "expression"