Why Memory Safety Issues Still Plague New C/C++ Code—and How to Eliminate Them

Key Points:

• Memory safety vulnerabilities are the most prevalent source of security risks in C and C++ applications, accounting for approximately 70% of high-severity vulnerabilities.
• Undefined behavior in C/C++ code leads to security flaws like buffer overflows, use-after-free, type confusion, and pointer arithmetic bugs, making detection tools essential.
• Using TrustInSoft Analyzer, an exhaustive static analysis tool, alongside memory-safe programming practices, can significantly reduce these vulnerabilities.

Memory Safety: The Core Challenge in C and C++ Programming

Memory safety vulnerabilities are a well-known issue in software development using C and C++, two of the most powerful and widely used languages in system-level programming. Despite their age and the rise of newer languages, C and C++ are still the backbone of critical software in industries ranging from aerospace to telecommunications and embedded systems. Their flexibility and control over hardware make them indispensable, but this control comes at a high cost—especially when it comes to memory safety.

In fact, 70% of all high-severity security vulnerabilities in software written in C and C++ stem from memory safety issues. These problems arise from low-level memory manipulation, which, while providing performance benefits, opens the door to serious errors like buffer overflows, use-after-free bugs, or accesses to uninitialized memory. Left unchecked, these errors can lead to unpredictable behavior, system crashes, and exploitable vulnerabilities.

Even in newly developed codebases, these vulnerabilities persist, as recent studies show. Over the last 12 months, TrustInSoft has analyzed over half a million lines of C and C++ code during multiple proof-of-value analysis. The results were concerning: 27.5% of the issues detected were memory safety-related, and another 19% involved uninitialized variables and pointers. These figures highlight the ongoing nature of the problem, even in fresh projects.

So, what can developers do to mitigate these risks?

The Push for Memory-Safe Languages: Rust and Beyond

One solution to the memory safety crisis is to transition from C and C++ to memory-safe languages like Rust. Rust, in particular, has gained attention for its ownership and borrowing rules, which ensure safe memory management without sacrificing performance. Industries like automotive, aerospace, and cybersecurity are exploring Rust as a viable option for new projects, given its built-in safeguards against issues like use-after-free and buffer overflows.

While Rust combines both compile-time and runtime verifications to limit the impact of runtime errors, such runtime verifications may still lead to a termination of the running program. This is obviously unacceptable in an embedded, mission-critical system which needs to avoid these situations in the first place to ensure continuous service.

Separately, while Rust is an excellent choice for new codebases, the reality is that most existing software, especially in critical and embedded systems, is still written in C and C++. Migrating millions of lines of code is impractical in many cases, and C/C++ will continue to play a dominant role in certain performance-sensitive or hardware-dependent applications.

Why Memory Safety Is Critical

Ignoring memory safety is not an option. Memory-related vulnerabilities lead to more than just bugs—they create exploitable security holes that hackers can use to execute code, leak data, or crash systems. Consider a buffer overflow, where an attacker overwrites adjacent memory with malicious code. This can lead to unauthorized system access, data theft, or complete system control.

For businesses, the costs are enormous: compromised security, service outages, and regulatory penalties for data breaches. Ensuring memory safety in C and C++ code is not just about writing better software—it’s about protecting your business from potentially devastating consequences.

Solutions to the Memory Safety Problem

Fortunately, solutions do exist to address memory safety challenges in C and C++ development. The key is adopting a combination of best practices, modern tools, and, when possible, transitioning to safer languages like Rust. Here are four steps to mitigate memory safety issues:

Use Lightweight Formal Methods, like sound abstract interpretation, for Exhaustive Static Analysis

TrustInSoft Analyzer leverages formal methods—a mathematically rigorous approach to verify software correctness. Unlike traditional static analyzers that rely on heuristics and produce false positives, TrustInSoft guarantees 100% detection of undefined behaviors in C and C++ code. This includes vulnerabilities such as buffer overflows, uninitialized memory access, use-after-free, and integer overflows. Developers can achieve full code coverage, ensuring that no memory-related vulnerabilities go unnoticed.

This type of analysis is especially valuable in legacy systems or large codebases, where manual inspection would be time-consuming and error prone. It’s also a huge time-saver for new codebases, where it catches vulnerabilities early in the development cycle, preventing costly post-deployment fixes.

Leverage Target-Aware Emulation

TrustInSoft Analyzer’s target-aware emulation feature allows developers to simulate the hardware environment their code will run on, ensuring real-world conditions are mirrored during the verification process. This ensures that bugs related to memory safety, which may only occur under specific hardware configurations, are detected early. Catching these errors in development rather than in production significantly reduces the risk of security vulnerabilities later in the software lifecycle.

Focus on Memory-Safe Programming Practices

Developers must follow best practices when writing C and C++ code. This includes adopting coding standards that prioritize memory safety, conducting regular code reviews, and using modern static analysis tools to catch memory-related bugs early. Combining these practices with formal verification tools like TrustInSoft Analyzer provides a solid defense against memory safety issues.

Adopt Memory-Safe Languages Where Possible

For new projects, adopting memory-safe languages like Rust can drastically reduce the likelihood of memory safety issues. However, given that migrating entire C and C++ codebases isn’t practical for many organizations, using a hybrid approach—introducing Rust where possible while continuing to secure existing C/C++ code with tools like TrustInSoft Analyzer—is a pragmatic solution.

The TrustInSoft Advantage

TrustInSoft Analyzer offers developers a comprehensive solution to the memory safety problem in C and C++ codebases. By providing exhaustive static analysis with mathematical precision, it ensures that no undefined behavior goes undetected. Here are some of its key benefits:

• Comprehensive Detection: TrustInSoft Analyzer catches all types of undefined behaviors, including buffer overflows, use-after-free, integer overflows, and more.
• Mathematical Precision: Using sound abstract interpretation, a class of formal methods, it guarantees 100% test coverage, leaving no corner cases unchecked.
• Early Detection: By integrating early in the development cycle, TrustInSoft Analyzer helps developers prevent costly post-release security fixes.
• Seamless Workflow Integration: Whether your team follows Agile or V-model methodologies, TrustInSoft Analyzer integrates smoothly, improving security without disrupting existing workflows.

Takeaways

If you’re developing in C or C++, memory safety isn’t a problem you can afford to ignore. Undefined behaviors like buffer overflows, use-after-free errors, and uninitialized memory are active vulnerabilities that can expose your software to attacks. TrustInSoft Analyzer provides the comprehensive protection you need, catching these issues before they cause harm.

Take the first step toward securing your code. Contact TrustInSoft today for a demo of our Analyzer and see how we can help safeguard your C and C++ code from memory safety vulnerabilities.