Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by aa-jv on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @09:38AM (#33330290)

.. and combined with coverage they also tell you what you are yet to test properly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by fulafel on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @09:40AM (#33330318)

s/properly//

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by kevincox on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @09:58AM (#33330525)

Actually: It tells you some things that are not tested properly.

Just because something has coverage doesn't mean that it is tested properly as evidenced by this bug even though sqlite has 100% branch coverage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by Macha on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @10:34AM (#33330990)

Yeah, coverage (or rather 100% - coverage) is basically a lower bound on what's not tested.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by masklinn on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @10:51AM (#33331257)

Even "coverage" is not enough, what 100% coverage? Lines? Branches? Paths?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Stranger Strings: An exploitable flaw in SQLite by Macha on Tuesday October 25, 2022 @01:40PM (#33333764)

That's my point, coverage (whatever your chosen metric) can only prove the absence of tests, not their presence

[ Parent | on HN ]