Variant analysis

Variant Analysis

When you find a bug, the same mistake almost certainly exists elsewhere. Variant analysis systematically hunts for siblings of a known vulnerability.

Process

Step 1: Characterize the Original Bug

Before searching, understand what makes this bug a bug:

ORIGINAL BUG:
  File: src/api/users.ts:42
  Type: Missing input validation
  Pattern: req.params.id used directly in DB query without sanitization
  Root cause: Developer assumed framework sanitizes params
  Trigger: Untrusted input reaches database query

Extract the abstract pattern -- not the specific code, but the class of mistake:

• Missing validation at a trust boundary
• Incorrect error handling in auth path
• Race condition between check and use
• Hardcoded secret in source
• SQL injection via string concatenation

Step 2: Generate Search Queries

For each bug class, create multiple search strategies:

Grep/Ripgrep (Fast, broad)

# Example: SQL injection via concatenation
rg "query\(.*\+.*\)" --type ts
rg "execute\(.*\$\{" --type ts
rg "\.raw\(.*\+" --type ts

# Example: Missing auth middleware
rg "router\.(get|post|put|delete)\(" --type ts -l | \
  xargs rg -L "authenticate|authorize|requireAuth"

# Example: Hardcoded secrets
rg "(password|secret|key|token)\s*[=:]\s*['\"][^'\"]{8,}" --type ts

Semgrep (AST-aware, precise)

# Example: SQL injection
rules:
  - id: sql-injection-concatenation
    patterns:
      - pattern: $DB.query($X + ...)
      - pattern-not: $DB.query($X, [...])
    message: "Potential SQL injection via string concatenation"
    severity: ERROR

# Example: Missing null check before use
rules:
  - id: null-deref-after-find
    patterns:
      - pattern: |
          const $X = await $DB.findOne(...)
          ...
          $X.$PROP
      - pattern-not: |
          const $X = await $DB.findOne(...)
          ...
          if ($X) { ... }
    message: "Using findOne result without null check"
    severity: WARNING

CodeQL (Deep analysis)

// Example: Tainted data reaching SQL
import javascript

from CallExpr call, DataFlow::Node source, DataFlow::Node sink
where
  source = DataFlow::parameterNode(any(Function f).getAParameter()) and
  sink = call.getArgument(0) and
  call.getCalleeName() = "query" and
  DataFlow::localFlow(source, sink)
select sink, "Untrusted input flows to SQL query"

Step 3: Triage Results

For each match:

Status	Meaning	Action
CONFIRMED	Same bug pattern, exploitable	File as finding
LIKELY	Same pattern, needs deeper analysis	Investigate further
MITIGATED	Pattern present but other controls prevent exploitation	Document as defense-in-depth gap
FALSE POSITIVE	Pattern matches but context makes it safe	Document why it's safe

Step 4: Report

## Variant Analysis Report

**Original Finding**: [reference to original bug]
**Pattern**: [abstract description of the vulnerability class]
**Search Method**: [grep/semgrep/codeql/manual]

### Confirmed Variants

1. **[SEVERITY]** file.ts:42 -- [description]
2. **[SEVERITY]** other.ts:88 -- [description]

### Likely Variants (Need Investigation)

3. file2.ts:15 -- [why it might be vulnerable]

### Mitigated Instances

4. safe.ts:30 -- Same pattern but [mitigation] prevents exploitation

### Statistics

- Files scanned: X
- Matches found: Y
- Confirmed: Z
- False positives: W

Common Variant Patterns

Input Validation Variants

If one endpoint lacks validation, check ALL endpoints:

# Find all route handlers
rg "router\.(get|post|put|delete|patch)\(" --type ts -n

# Check each for validation middleware
# Missing validation = variant

Auth/Authz Variants

If one route lacks auth, check all routes:

# Find routes without auth middleware
rg "app\.(get|post)\(['\"]" --type ts | grep -v "auth\|protect\|require"

Error Handling Variants

If one catch block leaks info, check all catch blocks:

rg "catch.*\{" -A 3 --type ts | grep -E "res\.(send|json).*err"

Crypto Variants

If one place uses weak crypto, check all crypto usage:

rg "createHash\(|createCipher\(|randomBytes\(" --type ts
rg "MD5\|SHA1\|DES\|RC4" --type ts

Race Condition Variants

If one TOCTOU exists, check similar check-then-act patterns:

rg "if.*await.*find" -A 5 --type ts | grep -E "await.*(update|delete|create)"

Automation Integration

With coroner agent (post-mortem)

After fixing a bug, coroner should:

1. Call variant-analysis with the bug pattern
2. Check all confirmed variants
3. Create tasks for each variant fix

With security-reviewer agent

During review, if a finding is discovered:

1. Pause the linear review
2. Run variant analysis for the finding class
3. Include all variants in the review report

With code-reviewer agent

When a fix is reviewed:

1. Check if the fix addresses all known variants
2. Verify the fix pattern is applied consistently

Rationalizations to Reject

Rationalization	Why It's Wrong	Required Action
"It's just one instance"	Bugs travel in packs	Run variant analysis
"The other code is different"	Same pattern, different syntax	Abstract the pattern
"We already fixed this area"	Fix might be incomplete	Verify with search
"Semgrep didn't find anything"	Rules might be too specific	Try multiple search methods
"It's too many results"	Volume doesn't mean false positive	Triage each result

Inspired by Trail of Bits variant-analysis plugin.