Variadic functions access their variable arguments by using va_start()
to initialize an object of type va_list
, iteratively invoking the va_arg()
macro, and finally calling va_end()
. The va_list
may be passed as an argument to another function, but calling va_arg()
within that function causes the va_list
to have an indeterminate value in the calling function. As a result, attempting to read variable arguments without reinitializing the va_list
can have unexpected behavior. According to the C Standard, 7.16, paragraph 3 [ISO/IEC 9899:2011],
If access to the varying arguments is desired, the called function shall declare an object (generally referred to as
ap
in this subclause) having typeva_list
. The objectap
may be passed as an argument to another function; if that function invokes theva_arg
macro with parameterap
, the value ofap
in the calling function is indeterminate and shall be passed to theva_end
macro prior to any further reference toap
.253
253) It is permitted to create a pointer to ava_list
and pass that pointer to another function, in which case the original function may take further use of the original list after the other function returns.
Noncompliant Code Example
This noncompliant code example attempts to check that none of its variable arguments are zero by passing a va_list
to helper function contains_zero()
. After the call to contains_zero()
, the value of ap
is indeterminate.
#include <stdarg.h> #include <stdio.h> int contains_zero(size_t count, va_list ap) { for (size_t i = 1; i < count; ++i) { if (va_arg(ap, double) == 0.0) { return 1; } } return 0; } int print_reciprocals(size_t count, ...) { va_list ap; va_start(ap, count); if (contains_zero(count, ap)) { va_end(ap); return 1; } for (size_t i = 0; i < count; ++i) { printf("%f ", 1.0 / va_arg(ap, double)); } va_end(ap); return 0; }
Compliant Solution
The compliant solution modifies contains_zero()
to take a pointer to a va_list
. It then uses the va_copy
macro to make a copy of the list, traverses the copy, and cleans it up. Consequently, the print_reciprocals()
function is free to traverse the original va_list
.
#include <stdarg.h> #include <stdio.h> int contains_zero(size_t count, va_list *ap) { va_list ap1; va_copy(ap1, *ap); for (size_t i = 1; i < count; ++i) { if (va_arg(ap1, double) == 0.0) { return 1; } } va_end(ap1); return 0; } int print_reciprocals(size_t count, ...) { int status; va_list ap; va_start(ap, count); if (contains_zero(count, &ap)) { printf("0 in arguments!\n"); status = 1; } else { for (size_t i = 0; i < count; i++) { printf("%f ", 1.0 / va_arg(ap, double)); } printf("\n"); status = 0; } va_end(ap); return status; }
Risk Assessment
Reading variable arguments using a va_list
that has an indeterminate value can have unexpected results.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
MSC39-C | Low | Unlikely | Low | P3 | L3 |
Automated Detection
Tool | Version | Checker | Description |
---|---|---|---|
CodeSonar | 8.1p0 | BADMACRO.STDARG_H | Use of <stdarg.h> Feature |
Helix QAC | 2024.2 | C3497 C++3146, C++3147, C++3148, C++3149, C++3167 | |
Klocwork | 2024.2 | VA.LIST.INDETERMINATE | |
Parasoft C/C++test | 2023.1 | CERT_C-MSC39-a | Use macros for variable arguments correctly |
Polyspace Bug Finder | R2024a | Checks for:
Rule partially covered. | |
TrustInSoft Analyzer | 1.38 | variadic | Exhaustively verified. |
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
Bibliography
[ISO/IEC 9899:2011] | Subclause 7.16, "Variable Arguments <stdarg.h> " |
11 Comments
David Svoboda
ap
? some variable in the standard?Unknown User (astromme)
I've revised the title and introduction; hopefully they are clearer now.
I also changed the CS so that the copy is made within contains_zeroes, because that makes it clearer how contains_zeroes is meant to be used.
David Svoboda
Martin Sebor
I would recommend to avoid relying on semantics like those implemented in
contains_zero()
in the compliant solution. Instead, callers should defensively assume that the callee modifies theva_list
argument and pass to it a copy before manipulating the original. (I.e., just as when invoking one of the C standard library functions that take ava_list
argument, such asvsprintf()
.)Incidentally, this guideline covers undefined behavior 129. Besides this problem, UB 131 and UB 134 are common bugs as well. It would be nice to extend the scope of this guideline and discuss them as well.
David Svoboda
Aaron Ballman
va_copy does not exist in MSVC, so the CCE is not particularly useful there.
David Svoboda
va_copy is in C11 (and prob C99 too). I suppose a Windows-specific CS would be in order here.
Then again, how heavily are varargs used in Windows? I'd guess not muich.
Aaron Ballman
In C code; I would guess (based off nothing at all), they're used about the same amount as on other platforms. I've seen it used in a handful of code bases myself. I'll think about a CS for Windows and see if I can come up with one.
Aaron Ballman
So this is not portably possible in Visual Studio until Visual Studio 2013 is released. On some platforms, you can simply assign the va_list, but on others platforms (notably ARM and x64) it may not be safe. Once 2013 is released, we should revise this rule.
Lucas Wang
Hi, I have a question about the NCCE.
The type
va_list
is used for argument pointer variables and I noticed that contains_zero() pass va_list by value, not referenced. Does contains_zero(count, ap) affect what `ap` point to?The compliant solution makes a copy to the va_list( can be interpreted as assign), the change to dest va_list won't affect the original va_list, is there any difference between passing by value and making a copy to the va_list?
Please help clarify, many thanks!
Aaron Ballman
Variable argument lists are a bit of a strange beast because each architecture does them slightly differently. Because C doesn't have the notion of references, you would think passing a non-pointer value means that the passed object cannot be changed by the caller, but that's not true with variable argument lists because they're essentially magic. This is why the standard explicitly calls out this behavior in the text quoted in the intro paragraph.