On Fri, 17 Jun 2022 07:04:47 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> * This adds additional permissions to the jdk.random module 
>> (`RuntimePermission "accessClassInPackage.jdk.internal.util.random"`)
>> * The annotations of the provider classes are now parsed early.  
>>   This avoids putting the parts that can trigger the parsing into an 
>> `AccessController.doPrivileged()` block.
>> * If a `SecurityManager` is installed, `RandomGeneratorFactory.all()` will 
>> only return `RandomGenerator`s that are loaded by a system domain loader.  
>>   This avoids parsing annotations of user classes from a privileged context.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/random/RandomGeneratorFactory.java line 
> 141:
> 
>> 139: 
>> 140:     private static class FactoryMapHolder {
>> 141:         static final Map<String, Provider<? extends RandomGenerator>> 
>> FACTORY_MAP = createFactoryMap();
> 
> Unrelated to this PR, but a more general question. It appears that this 
> `FACTORY_MAP` gets cached on first use/call. A few questions about the 
> `createFactoryMap` method:
> 1. The javadoc of that private method says:
> 
> /**
>          * Returns the factory map, lazily constructing map on first use.
>          *
>          * @return Map of RandomGeneratorFactory classes.
>          */
> 
> But the implementation and the signature of this method actually return a Map 
> of `RandomGenerator` classes and not the `RandomGeneratorFactory` classes.
> 2. The implementation of this method internally uses the `ServiceLoader` to 
> load the `RandomGenerator` service provider implementations. The internal 
> implementation of the `ServiceLoader` will use a Thread context classloader 
> that is set on the calling thread. The result of the call to this 
> `createFactoryMap` is then cached once and for all in the `FACTORY_MAP`. 
> Would this then lead to a non-deterministic behaviour where whoever ends up 
> initializing this `FactoryMapHolder` first, will end up storing those 
> RandomGenerators for every one else? Is this intentional? Do you think this 
> caching should be reviewed?

Good point. It might be useful to explicitly pass the boot layer to the service 
loader.

But that is outside the scope of this bug - my goal here is just to make it not 
throw an exception when running with a SecurityManager while not introducing 
security vulnerabilities.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9180

Reply via email to