On 3/5/2014 2:47 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
> Change looks fine, so does the closed repo.
Thanks for the code review.
> Hopefully you've already run both the automatic and manual tests.
>
Yes.
I will integrate the fix as soon as possible.
Xuelei
> Thanks
> Max
>
> On Mar 3, 2014, at 21:58, Xuelei
Hi,
I need a review for changes that cover JNI pending exceptions for
j2secmod.c, j2secmod_md.c, and p11_md.c
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ascarpino/8036543/webrev.00/
thanks
Tony
Change looks fine, so does the closed repo. Hopefully you've already run both
the automatic and manual tests.
Thanks
Max
On Mar 3, 2014, at 21:58, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Just as you see, webrev is ugly. Here is the export changeset:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8032473/update.export
>
Am Tue, 4 Mar 2014 22:56:17 +0100
schrieb Philipp Heckel :
> ad 3) FilterInputStream and InputStream have no special requirements
> with regard to how encrypted data is processed.
Actually there are examples in the JDK who does checksum after
returning data. For example the GZIPInputStream. And t
Thank you all for your comments. I must say this is a very interesting
discussion. And I really hope that you keep an open mind when looking for a
solution -- I am certainly trying to do the same!
You can't increase security by implementing incorrect semantics, you just
> get something that is bro
On 03/04/2014 08:49 AM, Philipp Heckel wrote:
Although Tim and Matthew already mentioned the main points, I'd like to
voice my concerns as well -- in particular because I think that this is
*not* a philosophical argument: Security must always be more important
than the supposedly correct semantic
