Catching NullPointerException should not be used as an alternative to programmatic checks to prevent dereferencing a null pointer.
Programmers typically catch NullPointerException under three circumstances: - The program contains a null pointer dereference. Catching the resulting exception was easier than fixing the underlying problem. - The program explicitly throws a NullPointerException to signal an error condition. - The code is part of a test harness that supplies unexpected input to the classes under test. Of these three circumstances, only the last is acceptable.
Do not extensively rely on catching exceptions (especially for validating user input) to handle errors. Handling exceptions can decrease the performance of an application.
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Framework-based Fuzzer
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Source code Weakness Analyzer Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer
Effectiveness: High
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful: ``` Highly cost effective: ``` Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction ``` Cost effective for partial coverage: ``` Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)
Effectiveness: High