Difference between revisions of "Static Code Analysis"

Jump to: navigation, search
Line 36: Line 36:
== Tools ==
== Tools ==
= Open Source/Free =
=== Open Source/Free ===
Line 47: Line 47:
* FindBugs
* FindBugs
= Commercial =
=== Commercial ===
* Fortify
* Fortify

Revision as of 07:06, 5 January 2012

This article is a stub. You can help OWASP by expanding it or discussing it on its Talk page.

Every Control should follow this template.

This is a control. To view all control, please see the Control Category page.

Last revision (mm/dd/yy): 01/5/2012


Static Code Analysis is usually performed as part of a Code Review and is carried out at the Implementation phase of a Security Development Lifecycle (SDL). Static Code Analysis commonly refers to the running of Static Code Analysis tools that attempt to highlight possible vulnerabilities within source code by using techniques such as Flow Control and/or Pattern Matching.

Risk Factors

  • Talk about the factors that this control affects
  • What effect does this countermeasure have on the attack or vulnerability?
  • Does this control reduce the technical or business impact?

Difficulty to Implement

  • Discuss the typical difficulty of implementing this control, emphasizing the factors that make it easier or harder
  • Steer clear of language/platform specific information here


Short example name

A short example description, small picture, or sample code with links

Short example name

A short example description, small picture, or sample code with links


Open Source/Free

  • PMD -
  • FlawFinder
  • Microsoft FxCop
  • Splint
  • Boon
  • Pscan
  • FindBugs


  • Fortify
  • Ounce labs Prexis
  • Veracode
  • GrammaTech
  • ParaSoft
  • ITS4
  • Code Wizard
  • Armorize CodeSecure
  • Checkmarx CxSuite

Related Attacks

Related Vulnerabilities

Related Controls