False Negative : CloseSql.ql cannot detect bugs in the Try-Catch block.
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100
Research direction
Start by reading the Java resource-leak query in CloseSql.ql and compare its handling of the direct createStatement case with the Supplier example's try-catch block. Done means the query reports the discarded Statement created by supplier.get() while preserving the existing detection.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Version
codeql 2.23.9
Description of the issue
When I used java/Likely Bugs/Resource Leaks/CloseSql.ql to check the following code, it correctly reported an issue of improper use of createStatement.
import java.sql.Connection;
import java.sql.DriverManager;
import java.sql.SQLException;
import java.sql.Statement;
public class PosCase3 {
public void test() throws SQLException {
// Scenario 3: Primary resource assigned
Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection("url", "user", "pass");
// Secondary created from primary, not assigned, not closed
conn.createStatement(); // [REPORTED LINE]
// Secondary Statement leak -> Positive detection.
}
}
However, when using CloseSql.ql to detect the following code, no bug were detected and no bug were reported.
import java.sql.Connection;
import java.sql.DriverManager;
import java.sql.SQLException;
import java.sql.Statement;
import java.util.function.Supplier;
public class PosCase3_Var3 {
public void test() throws SQLException {
// Variant 3: Use Supplier to defer creation, then discard
Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection("url", "user", "pass");
Supplier<Statement> supplier = () -> {
try {
return conn.createStatement();
} catch (SQLException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
};
supplier.get(); // Statement created and leaked
}
}
- Dominant language
- CodeQL
- Stars
- 10.1k
- Forks
- 2.1k
- Avg merge
- 2d 16h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 143
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from github/codeql
-
agentic-workflows
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
-
false-positive javascript
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
-
C#: cs/simplifiable-boolean-expression false positive on Nullable<bool> compared with a literal Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
-
false-positive
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
punkpeye/mcp-remote#369 ·
-
Mend: dependency security vulnerability untriaged
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 86/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
-
bug
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
cisagov/vulnrichment#337 ·
-
bug DUP Reservations
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
bcgov/reserve-rec-public#896 ·