SonarSource Rules
  • Products

    In-IDE

    Code Quality and Security in your IDE with SonarQube Ide

    IDE extension that lets you fix coding issues before they exist!

    Discover SonarQube for IDE

    SaaS

    Code Quality and Security in the cloud with SonarQube Cloud

    Setup is effortless and analysis is automatic for most languages

    Discover SonarQube Cloud

    Self-Hosted

    Code Quality and Security Self-Hosted with SonarQube Server

    Fast, accurate analysis; enterprise scalability

    Discover SonarQube Server
  • SecretsSecrets
  • ABAPABAP
  • AnsibleAnsible
  • ApexApex
  • AzureResourceManagerAzureResourceManager
  • CC
  • C#C#
  • C++C++
  • CloudFormationCloudFormation
  • COBOLCOBOL
  • CSSCSS
  • DartDart
  • DockerDocker
  • FlexFlex
  • GitHub ActionsGitHub Actions
  • GoGo
  • HTMLHTML
  • JavaJava
  • JavaScriptJavaScript
  • JSONJSON
  • JCLJCL
  • KotlinKotlin
  • KubernetesKubernetes
  • Objective CObjective C
  • PHPPHP
  • PL/IPL/I
  • PL/SQLPL/SQL
  • PythonPython
  • RPGRPG
  • RubyRuby
  • RustRust
  • ScalaScala
  • SwiftSwift
  • TerraformTerraform
  • TextText
  • TypeScriptTypeScript
  • T-SQLT-SQL
  • VB.NETVB.NET
  • VB6VB6
  • XMLXML
  • YAMLYAML
Go

Go static code analysis

Unique rules to find Bugs, Vulnerabilities, Security Hotspots, and Code Smells in your GO code

  • All rules 70
  • Vulnerability20
  • Bug7
  • Security Hotspot14
  • Code Smell29
 
Tags
    Impact
      Clean code attribute
        1. Credentials should not be hard-coded

           Vulnerability
        2. Extracting archives should not lead to zip slip vulnerabilities

           Vulnerability
        3. JWT should be signed and verified with strong cipher algorithms

           Vulnerability
        4. Cipher algorithms should be robust

           Vulnerability
        5. Encryption algorithms should be used with secure mode and padding scheme

           Vulnerability
        6. Server hostnames should be verified during SSL/TLS connections

           Vulnerability
        7. Insecure temporary file creation methods should not be used

           Vulnerability
        8. Passwords should not be stored in plaintext or with a fast hashing algorithm

           Vulnerability
        9. HTTP request redirections should not be open to forging attacks

           Vulnerability
        10. Logging should not be vulnerable to injection attacks

           Vulnerability
        11. Server-side requests should not be vulnerable to forging attacks

           Vulnerability
        12. Server certificates should be verified during SSL/TLS connections

           Vulnerability
        13. Cryptographic keys should be robust

           Vulnerability
        14. Weak SSL/TLS protocols should not be used

           Vulnerability
        15. Database queries should not be vulnerable to injection attacks

           Vulnerability
        16. Cipher Block Chaining IVs should be unpredictable

           Vulnerability
        17. XPath expressions should not be vulnerable to injection attacks

           Vulnerability
        18. I/O function calls should not be vulnerable to path injection attacks

           Vulnerability
        19. OS commands should not be vulnerable to command injection attacks

           Vulnerability
        20. Password hashing functions should use an unpredictable salt

           Vulnerability

        Server-side requests should not be vulnerable to forging attacks

        intentionality - complete
        security
        Vulnerability
        • cwe
        • injection

        Why is this an issue?

        How can I fix it?

        More Info

        Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) occurs when attackers can coerce a server to perform arbitrary requests on their behalf.

        An SSRF vulnerability can either be basic or blind, depending on whether the server’s fetched data is directly returned in the web application’s response.
        The absence of the corresponding response for the coerced request on the application is not a barrier to exploitation and thus must be treated in the same way as basic SSRF.

        What is the potential impact?

        SSRF usually results in unauthorized actions or data disclosure in the vulnerable application or on a different system it can reach. Conditional to what is reachable, remote command execution can be achieved, although it often requires chaining with further exploitations.

        Information disclosure is SSRF’s core outcome. Depending on the extracted data, an attacker can perform a variety of different actions that can range from low to critical severity.

        Below are some real-world scenarios that illustrate some impacts of an attacker exploiting the vulnerability.

        Local file read to host takeover

        An attacker manipulates an application into performing a local request for a sensitive file, such as ~/.ssh/id_rsa, by using the File URI scheme file://.
        Once in possession of the SSH keys, the attacker establishes a remote connection to the system hosting the web application.

        Internal Network Reconnaissance

        An attacker enumerates internal accessible ports from the affected server or others to which the server can communicate by iterating over the port field in the URL http://127.0.0.1:{port}.
        Taking advantage of other supported URL schemas (dependent on the affected system), for example, gopher://127.0.0.1:3306, an attacker would be able to connect to a database service and perform queries on it.

          Available In:
        • SonarQube CloudDetect issues in your GitHub, Azure DevOps Services, Bitbucket Cloud, GitLab repositories
        • SonarQube ServerAnalyze code in your
          on-premise CI

        © 2008-2025 SonarSource SA. All rights reserved.

        Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Terms of Use