• Post Reply Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic
programming forums Java Mobile Certification Databases Caching Books Engineering Micro Controllers OS Languages Paradigms IDEs Build Tools Frameworks Application Servers Open Source This Site Careers Other Pie Elite all forums
this forum made possible by our volunteer staff, including ...
Marshals:
  • Campbell Ritchie
  • Jeanne Boyarsky
  • Ron McLeod
  • Paul Clapham
  • Liutauras Vilda
Sheriffs:
  • paul wheaton
  • Rob Spoor
  • Devaka Cooray
Saloon Keepers:
  • Stephan van Hulst
  • Tim Holloway
  • Carey Brown
  • Frits Walraven
  • Tim Moores
Bartenders:
  • Mikalai Zaikin

sensors vs theoretical issues

 
author & internet detective
Posts: 41860
908
Eclipse IDE VI Editor Java
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
    Number of slices to send:
    Optional 'thank-you' note:
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Contrast's Eclipse plugin uses sensors to determine if there are security issues in code that actually gets run. I like this approach as the number of false positives is low. When getting a manual code review (or one from a tool), there are typical "issues" reported that can't actually occur. I call these theoretical (or hypothetical) issues depending on what mood I'm in. Because to actually have a vulnerability you'd have to change the code in a specific series of ways. As much as I find these annoying in a security test, they do have value. It's good to be able to clean up that code before someone sees it and thinks it would be good to call.

Does anyone have any experience with either of these?
reply
    Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic