github / github/codeql

False Negative: ImplicitPendingIntents.ql misses mutable implicit PendingIntents once they are stored, enriched, or sent through slightly noisier code paths.

Ouverte
#21,548 1 commentaire 0 réactions 0 personnes assignées Voir sur GitHub
Langage dominant
CodeQL
Étoiles
10.1k
Forks
2.1k
Merge moyen
2 j 15 h
PR mergées (30 j)
141

Description

# False Negative: ImplicitPendingIntents.ql misses mutable implicit PendingIntents once they are stored, enriched, or sent through slightly noisier code paths.

Version
codeql 2.24.3

## Checker
- Checker id: `Security/CWE/CWE-927/ImplicitPendingIntents.ql`
- Checker description: This checker detects when an implicit Intent is created and then flows into a PendingIntent that is sent to an unspecified third party.

## Description of the false negative
These cases still create an implicit `Intent`, wrap it in a mutable `PendingIntent`, and then send that `PendingIntent` to an unspecified recipient. The extra parcelable write, field store, or unrelated array read does not change the security outcome.

## Affected test cases
### `PosCase1.java`
The intent remains implicit when it is wrapped in the `PendingIntent` and sent onward. The extra statements do not make it safe.

```java
// Implicit Intent with mutable PendingIntent sent to third party, including allowed implicit read of parcelable extra, should be flagged as unsafe.
package scensct.core.pos;

import android.app.PendingIntent;
import android.content.Context;
import android.content.Intent;
import android.os.Parcelable;

public class PosCase1 {
public void sendPendingIntentToThirdParty(Context context, Parcelable extraData) {
// Implicit Intent creation
Intent implicitIntent = new Intent("com.example.ACTION_TRIGGER");
// Allowed implicit read of parcelable extra (policy allows reading parcelable extras)
implicitIntent.putExtra("key", extraData);
// Create mutable PendingIntent from implicit Intent
PendingIntent pending = PendingIntent.getActivity(
context,
0,
implicitIntent,
PendingIntent.FLAG_MUTABLE
);
// Send to unspecified third party via PendingIntent.send()
try {
pending.send();
} catch (PendingIntent.CanceledException e) {
// Handle exception
}
}
}
```

### `PosCase2.java`
This still creates a mutable implicit `PendingIntent` for an unspecified recipient. The issue is unchanged.

```java
// Implicit Intent with mutable PendingIntent sent to third party, including implicit read of PendingIntent field, should be flagged as unsafe.
package scensct.core.pos;

import android.app.PendingIntent;
import android.content.Context;
import android.content.Intent;

public class PosCase2 {
static class Container {
PendingIntent pendingIntentField;
}

public void sendPendingIntentToThirdParty(Context context, Container container) {
// Implicit Intent creation
Intent implicitIntent = new Intent("com.example.ACTION_TRIGGER");
// Create mutable PendingIntent from implicit Intent
PendingIntent pending = PendingIntent.getActivity(
context,
0,
implicitIntent,
PendingIntent.FLAG_MUTABLE
);
// Implicit read of PendingIntent field (reading container.pendingIntentField)
container.pendingIntentField = pending;
// Send to unspecified third party via PendingIntent.send()
try {
container.pendingIntentField.send();
} catch (PendingIntent.CanceledException e) {
// Handle exception
}
}
}
```

### `PosCase3.java`
The added statements are incidental. The important part is that the implicit intent still flows into a third-party `PendingIntent`.

```java
// Implicit Intent with mutable PendingIntent sent to third party, including implicit read of Intent array, should be flagged as unsafe.
package scensct.core.pos;

import android.app.PendingIntent;
import android.content.Context;
import android.content.Intent;

public class PosCase3 {
public void sendPendingIntentToThirdParty(Context context, Intent[] intentArray, int index) {
// Implicit Intent creation
Intent implicitIntent = new Intent("com.example.ACTION_TRIGGER");
// Create mutable PendingIntent from implicit Intent
PendingIntent pending = PendingIntent.getActivity(
context,
0,
implicitIntent,
PendingIntent.FLAG_MUTABLE
);
// Implicit read of Intent array (accessing intentArray[index])
Intent retrievedIntent = intentArray[index];
// Send to unspecified third party via PendingIntent.send()
try {
pending.send();
} catch (PendingIntent.CanceledException e) {
// Handle exception
}
}
}
```

## Cause analysis
The query appears too dependent on a direct, linear construction-to-send pattern. Once the `PendingIntent` is written to a field, accompanied by another benign read, or the `Intent` is slightly enriched before wrapping, the result disappears.

That is too brittle for `Security/CWE/CWE-927/ImplicitPendingIntents.ql`. Real Android code rarely keeps these flows in a single minimal statement sequence.

## References
None known.

Guide de contribution

Ouvrir le guide de contribution

Piste de recherche

Commencez par Security/CWE/CWE-927/ImplicitPendingIntents.ql et les exemples concernés PosCase1.java, PosCase2.java et PosCase3.java. Reproduisez les faux négatifs et retracez la manière dont les écritures de parcelable, le stockage des champs et les lectures de tableaux affectent le flux de la construction à l’envoi ; c’est terminé lorsque ces PendingIntents implicites mutables envoyés à des destinataires non spécifiés sont signalés.

Rédigé par le modèle d'indexation à partir du texte de l'issue.

Évaluation

Stack technique
java
Domaine
mobile-dev, security
Type d'issue
Bug
Difficulté
4/5
Temps estimé
3-5 jours
Activité
Calme
Clarté
Plutôt claire
Accessibilité débutants
48/100

Recevez les nouvelles issues par e-mail

Un résumé court des issues GitHub adaptées aux débutants.