Update docs/code-quality/c26833.md

Xazax-hun · dmitrykobets-msft · web-flow · commit 29abced1919e · 2023-03-08T09:06:11.000-08:00
Co-authored-by: dmitrykobets-msft &lt;89153909+dmitrykobets-msft@users.noreply.github.com&gt;
diff --git a/docs/code-quality/c26833.md b/docs/code-quality/c26833.md
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ void foo(unsigned i, unsigned j)
 ```
 
 The code example above has a check `size > 50`. Unfortunately, this check is too late. In case `i + j` overflows, it produces a small value that passes the check. So, `SmallAlloc` allocates a buffer smaller than expected. Future accesses of the buffer like `p[i]` are out of bounds. These code patterns can result in remote code execution vulnerabilities.
-Common allocation functions like `new`, `malloc`, and `VirtalAlloc` are recognized. The check also tries to recognize custom allocator functions by case insensitive search for the `alloc` substring in the function name.
+Common allocation functions like `new`, `malloc`, and `VirtualAlloc` are recognized. The check also tries to recognize custom allocator functions by case insensitive search for the `alloc` substring in the function name.
 
 Our analysis engine's numerical solver have some limitations reasoning about numerical overflows. As a result, this check is using some heuristics and sometimes fails to recognize that certain checks can prevent overflows.
 Usually, checking for a reasonable bound on the allocation should work. 
