Submitted via IRC for SoyCow2718
Facebook doesn't have the most stellar privacy and security track record, especially given that many of its notable gaffes were avoidable. But with billions of users and a gargantuan platform to defend, it's not easy to catch every flaw in the company's 100 million lines of code. So four years ago, Facebook engineers began building a customized assessment tool that not only checks for known types of bugs but can fully scan the entire codebase in under 30 minutes—helping engineers catch issues in tweaks, changes, or major new features before they go live.
The platform, dubbed Zoncolan, is a "static analysis" tool that maps the behavior and functions of the codebase and looks for potential problems in individual branches, as well as in the interactions of various paths through the program. Having people manually review endless code changes all the time is impractical at such a large scale. But static analysis scales extremely well, because it sets "rules" about undesirable architecture or code behavior, and automatically scans the system for these classes of bugs. See it once, catch it forever. Ideally, the system not only flags potential problems but gives engineers real-time feedback and helps them learn to avoid pitfalls.
"Every time an engineer makes a proposed change to our codebase, Zoncolan will start running in the background, and it will either report to that engineer directly or it will flag to one of our security engineers who's on call," says Pieter Hooimeijer, a security engineering manager at Facebook. "So it runs thousands of times a day, and found on the order of 1,500 issues in calendar year 2018."
Source: https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-zoncolan-static-analysis-tool/?verso=true
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday August 23 2019, @05:25PM (1 child)
>quack<!
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday August 23 2019, @05:33PM
You're right! Better to depend on unit testing which demonstrates that the code does the right thing, at least under certain conditions, rather than that it does the right thing in principle.
Not that I'm against unit testing. Just for testing higher level things that compilers cannot (yet) test. Because we cannot (yet) express those ideas in a language.
People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.