博客

How to catch and fix a Guice dependency injection issue using Sensei

January 25, 2021
Alan Richardson

The Sensei project itself has its own set of recipes that have built up over time. This blog post is an example of one of the scenarios the Sensei team built a recipe for. A misconfiguration of Guice, which led to a NullPointerException being reported at runtime during testing.

This can be generalized to many Dependency Injection scenarios where code is syntactically correct, but because the wiring configuration was incorrect, an error slips through.

This often happens when we are learning the technology, and we keep making the simple mistake of forgetting to wire things up. But this also happens to experienced professionals because, well... we all make mistakes, and we may not have Unit Tests to cover everything.

 

RunTime Exceptions from Incorrect Dependency Injection Wiring

The code below fails at runtime with a NullPointerException.

‍

injector = Guice.createInjector(new SystemOutModule());
CountReporter reporter = injector.getInstance(CountReporter.class);
String [] lines5 = {"1: line", "2: line", "3: line", "4: line", "5: line"};
reporter.reportThisMany(Arrays.asList(lines5));
Assertions.assertEquals(5, reporter.getCount());


The code is syntactically correct but fails because we missed out a requestStaticInjection in our SystemOutModule configuration.

‍

public class SystemOutModule extends AbstractModule {
    @Override
    protected void configure() {
        binder().bind(ILineReporter.class).to(SystemOutReporter.class);
    }
}


When we try to use the reporter, created using the Injector, it is not fully instantiated and we receive a NullPointerException when we call reportThisMany.

We may well have missed that in our code review, or we didn't have unit tests that triggered the dependency injection, and it slipped out into our build.

‍

Warning Signs

In this case, there is a warning sign, the CountReporter has a static field annotated with @Inject but... the CountReporter class itself is package private.

In a complicated code base this could be a warning sign that the code is incorrect because the Module class configuring the bindings needs to be in the same package for this to work.

‍

class CountReporter {
    @Inject
    private static ILineReporter reporter;


Another error that we made, which we might have picked up in a code review, is that we forgot to actually bind the fields in the SystemOutModule configure method.

binder().requestStaticInjection(CountReporter.class);


Had we written the requestStaticInjection code then the Syntax Error generated when trying to use the CountReporter would have alerted us to the simple error.

> 'reporters.CountReporter' is not public in 'reporters'. Cannot be accessed from outside package

‍

Sadly. We forgot, and there were no syntactic warning signs in the code.

How could Sensei help?

We probably wouldn't use Sensei to pick up the missing requestStaticInjection since all our Guice configuration wiring would need to use that method, and we can't guarantee that all wiring is going to be as simple as this use-case.

We could write a Sensei rule to look for some warning signs that our code is not up to scratch.

In this case that would mean:

  • Find any classes with @Inject annotated fields
  • Where the classes are not public.

The above was the warning sign that they were unlikely to have been wired up.

By creating a recipe, then we will have a warning sign early, during the coding, and reduce the reliance on our pull requests or resolving our tech debt to allow us to add Unit Tests.

How to create a recipe?

The task I want to complete is:

  • Create a recipe that matches fields annotated with @Inject which are in protected private classes

That should hopefully give us enough warning to identify any Modules using it and add the missing wiring code.

In my CountReporter class, I will use Alt+Enter to Create a new Recipe and I will start from scratch

I will name this and add a description:

Name: Guice: Injected Field Not Public
Description: If the Injected field is not public then the code might not be wired up
Level: Warning


The search I write looks for a class with a field annotated as Inject but which has not been scoped as public.

search:
  field:
    with:
      annotation:
        type: "com.google.inject.Inject"
    in:
      class:
        without:
          modifier: "public"

Fix

The QuickFix in the recipe will amend the injected class by changing the scope. But that is not the only code I have to change.

availableFixes:

- name: "Change class to public. Remember to also request injection on this class"
  actions:
  - changeModifiers:
      visibility: "public"
      target: "parentClass"
Sensei edit recipe QuickFix settings

When the recipe is triggered I still have a manual step to perform in my code, adding the line containing requestStaticInjection to fully instantiate the object.

public class SystemOutModule extends AbstractModule {
    @Override
    protected void configure() {
        binder().bind(ILineReporter.class).to(SystemOutReporter.class);
        // instantiate via dependency injection
        binder().requestStaticInjection(CountReporter.class);
    }
}


I could potentially write another recipe to pick this up. I probably wouldn't do that unless forgetting to add the static injection became a semi-regular error that I made when coding.

‍

Summary

If we ever find ourselves making a mistake with a common root pattern, then Sensei can help codify the knowledge around detecting and fixing the issue, and then hopefully, it won't slip through code reviews and into production.

Sometimes the recipes we write identify heuristic patterns i.e. matching them doesn't guarantee that there is a problem, but is likely that there is a problem.

Also, the recipes and QuickFixes that we write, don't have to be fully comprehensive, they need to be good enough that they help us identify and fix problems without being overcomplicated. Because when they become overcomplicated they become harder to understand and harder to maintain.

---


You can install Sensei from within IntelliJ using "Preferences \ Plugins" (Mac) or "Settings \ Plugins" (Windows) then just search for "sensei secure code".


The source code and recipes for this post can be found in the `sensei-blog-examples` repository in the Secure Code Warrior GitHub account, in the `guiceexamples` module.


https://github.com/securecodewarrior/sensei-blog-examples

Learn more about Sensei



标语

在 AI 驱动的开发成果发布前实现有效治理

评估 AI 辅助风险,在提交代码时强制执行安全编码策略,并加速整个软件开发生命周期的安全交付。

预约演示
资源库

探索更多博客

获取有关安全编码、人工智能治理和软件风险管理的专家内容。

浏览全部
案例研究
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

Supercharged Security Awareness: How Tournaments are Inspiring Developers at Erste Group

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

了解更多
案例研究
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

Security as culture: How Blue Prism cultivates world-class secure developers

Learn how Blue Prism, the global leader in intelligent automation for the enterprise, used Secure Code Warrior's agile learning platform to create a security-first culture with their developers, achieve their business goals, and ship secure code at speed

了解更多
案例研究
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

统一的安全文化:Sage 如何打造其安全倡导者项目

了解 Sage 如何通过灵活且以关系为导向的方法提升安全性,成功培养了 200 多名安全倡导者,并实现了显著的风险降低。

了解更多
博客
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

2026年网络安全意识月:理解人工智能安全对企业防御至关重要

目前,大多数顶级人工智能公司已公开呼吁全球放缓人工智能的发展速度,以便安全防护措施能够跟上步伐。然而事实是,严重的安全问题已经显现。随着人工智能实施带来的经济成本和风险不断累积,无数安全领导者和高管团队正处于紧迫的境地。

了解更多
博客
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

赋能要素 8:打造项目品牌

成功的安全编码项目不仅需要优质的内容。赋能要素 8 展示了如何通过品牌化将参与过程转变为一种令人向往、以地位为驱动的体验。

了解更多
博客
筛选标签
这是 div 块中的一段文本。

每一位员工现在都处于 AI 网络安全的最前线

企业技术格局正以一种鲜有人预料到的速度发生剧变,直到为时已晚。我们已正式跨越了从人工编写代码和基础辅助编程,进入“智能体开发生命周期”(ADLC)的时代。虽然自主 AI 智能体有望在多个职能领域实现前所未有的效率,但它们也带来了全新的安全和监管风险。

了解更多

在产品发布前确保 AI 驱动的开发安全

洞察开发风险,执行安全策略,并在整个软件开发生命周期中预防漏洞。

预约演示
未找到相关项目。