Hi Rony,
On 01/22/18 16:35, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
Hi Peter,
thank you *very* much also for your kind explanations and even coming up with
agent code to
demonstrate how one could use that approach!
In fact I have been doing a static analysis in the past (since Java 1.1) to
determine
Hi,
Attaching the patch as a .patch or .txt file should be sufficient for
small contributions and example code.
Roger
On 1/22/2018 10:39 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
Hi,
On 22.01.2018 16:24, Roger Riggs wrote:
Contributions need to be submitted using the OpenJDK infrastructure to adhere
Hi,
On 22.01.2018 16:24, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Contributions need to be submitted using the OpenJDK infrastructure to adhere
> to the IP requirements.
Would you have a link which OpenJFDK infrastructure to use in this case?
> The mail lists shold pass attachments that are text and patches though
On 22.01.2018 12:18, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 22/01/2018 09:58, Peter Levart wrote:
>> :
>>
>> The 2nd problem is not trivial as you want to access a protected member on
>> behalf of some other
>> sub-class of the member's declaring class which is not cooperating
>> (voluntarily handing you an
Hi Peter,
thank you *very* much also for your kind explanations and even coming up with
agent code to
demonstrate how one could use that approach!
In fact I have been doing a static analysis in the past (since Java 1.1) to
determine whether
members should be accessible to Rexx, restricting
Hi,
Contributions need to be submitted using the OpenJDK infrastructure to
adhere to the IP requirements.
The mail lists shold pass attachments that are text and patches though
you may need to be
sure your mailer attaches them with the correct mime-types and/or
extensions.
Roger
p.s.
The
On 19.01.2018 15:38, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 18/01/2018 15:07, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>> An attachment in the email has been found to contain executable code and has
>> been removed.
>>
>> File removed : java9modules.zip, zip,cmd
>>
@Potential implementer of below trick BEWARE!
While I tried to be smart by "injecting" special java agent powers into
designated trusted class, the presented mechanism is NOT SAFE as I
identify the class only by it's name. An attacker might create it's own
pair of classes with same names
On 01/22/2018 12:18 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 22/01/2018 09:58, Peter Levart wrote:
:
The 2nd problem is not trivial as you want to access a protected
member on behalf of some other sub-class of the member's declaring
class which is not cooperating (voluntarily handing you an instance
of
Hi Rony,
On 01/22/2018 10:58 AM, Peter Levart wrote:
The 2nd problem is not trivial as you want to access a protected
member on behalf of some other sub-class of the member's declaring
class which is not cooperating (voluntarily handing you an instance of
its Lookup object). This currently
On 22/01/2018 09:58, Peter Levart wrote:
:
The 2nd problem is not trivial as you want to access a protected
member on behalf of some other sub-class of the member's declaring
class which is not cooperating (voluntarily handing you an instance of
its Lookup object). This currently requires
Hi Rony,
On 01/18/2018 04:11 PM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
On 18.01.2018 10:58, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 17/01/2018 18:53, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
:
Would you have concrete suggestions for this use-case, i.e. a framework that is
not part of a
module, but having a need to access public types
12 matches
Mail list logo
