Re: RFR 6474858 : CardChannel.transmit(CommandAPDU) throws unexpected ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException

2018-08-23 Thread Valerie Peng
Changes look good. Thanks, Valerie On 8/23/2018 1:40 PM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: Hello! This is a smartcardio related issue. If CardChannel.transmit() needs to issue an additional command, it reuses the array 'command' that was passed in as an argument, which may turn out to be shorter than n

Re: NPE in SupportedGroupsExtension

2018-08-23 Thread Thomas Lußnig
Hi, i enabled the logging but did not receive more usefull information. Maybe an hint how i get this NPE, i run an SSL Scan on "https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html";. And the check that cause the error contain an list of elliptical curves that are not all known i think. Gruß Thomas

Re: NPE in SupportedGroupsExtension

2018-08-23 Thread Jamil Nimeh
Hi Thomas, can you reproduce the issue with debug logging turned on?  It may be helpful in conjunction with the stack trace you've provided.  You should be able to turn it on with -Djavax.net.debug=ssl Thanks, --Jamil On 8/23/2018 2:41 PM, Thomas Lußnig wrote: Hi, i got these NPE on my Serve

Re: NPE in SupportedGroupsExtension

2018-08-23 Thread Xuelei Fan
Hi Thomas, I filed a bug for the tracking and further evaluation. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209916 Did you have more information? For example, the debug log or the group name used in the context? Thanks, Xuelei On 8/23/2018 2:41 PM, Thomas Lußnig wrote: Hi, i got these

NPE in SupportedGroupsExtension

2018-08-23 Thread Thomas Lußnig
Hi, i got these NPE on my Server. With Java: openjdk 11-ea 2018-09-25 OpenJDK Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11-ea+25) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 18.9 (build 11-ea+25, mixed mode) java.lang.NullPointerException     at java.base/sun.security.ssl.SupportedGroupsExtension$SupportedGroups.getEC

RFR 6474858 : CardChannel.transmit(CommandAPDU) throws unexpected ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException

2018-08-23 Thread Ivan Gerasimov
Hello! This is a smartcardio related issue. If CardChannel.transmit() needs to issue an additional command, it reuses the array 'command' that was passed in as an argument, which may turn out to be shorter than needed. The fix was verified locally with the manual test. Would you please help

SSLSocket session resumption not working with TLS 1.3 and 11+27

2018-08-23 Thread Simone Bordet
Hi, The code below reproduces a bug where session resumption is tested. Turns out that session resumption does happen on the client and on the server, but on the client the session id is not replaced with the resumed session id (while it is on the server). The code prints: session1 = Session(153

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Roger Riggs
Hi, In the case of supplying a filter to getObject the caller is intentionally replacing the system filter and can supply a filter that  performs it own checks and if desired can delegate to the system filter. Some thought does need to be designed into the filter supplied as to its purpose and

Conceptual feedback on new ECC JEP

2018-08-23 Thread Adam Petcher
I'm starting work on yet another ECC JEP[1], this time with the goal of developing improved implementations of existing algorithms, rather than implementing new ones. The JEP will re-implement ECDH and ECDSA for the 256-, 384-, and 521-bit NIST prime curves. The new implementation will be all J

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Weijun Wang
But calling getObject(filter) effectively overrides the system filter, is that a problem? > On Aug 23, 2018, at 11:51 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > > Hi Max, > > Yes, the stream is passed to the readObject method of the classes being > deserialized. > > But that's only a concern during the call t

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Roger Riggs
Hi Max, Yes, the stream is passed to the readObject method of the classes being deserialized. But that's only a concern during the call to a.readObject() not on the call to setObjectInputFilter. It would be reasonable I think for getObject0 to put a doPriv around the call to a.setObjectInp

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Weijun Wang
You mean during deserialization an untrusted object could be created that have a reference to the stream itself? > On Aug 23, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: > > Hi, > > The original basis for the security manager check was to ensure that the > filter could > not be replaced by untruste

Re: SSLSocket weird behavior in JDK 11+27

2018-08-23 Thread Xuelei Fan
Good catch! I filed a bug for the tracking and further evaluation. https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209893 Thanks, Xuelei On 8/23/2018 7:04 AM, Simone Bordet wrote: Hi, SSLSocket is behaving weird in 11+27. In particular: * Setup a SSLServerSocket. * Connect with a normal Socket (

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Roger Riggs
Hi, The original basis for the security manager check was to ensure that the filter could not be replaced by untrusted code including code in the classes being deserialized that have access to the ObjectInputStream. Regards, Roger On 8/23/18 10:00 AM, Weijun Wang wrote: This follows the con

SSLSocket weird behavior in JDK 11+27

2018-08-23 Thread Simone Bordet
Hi, SSLSocket is behaving weird in 11+27. In particular: * Setup a SSLServerSocket. * Connect with a normal Socket (rawClient). * Wrap rawClient into a SSLSocket (sslClient). * sslClient.startHandshake() Now a few cases: A) immediate rawClient.close() If the server is reading via InputStream.re

Re: [12] RFR 8193859: Allow user provided ObjectInputFilter in SealedObject and SignedObject

2018-08-23 Thread Weijun Wang
This follows the convention of ObjectInputStream::setObjectInputFilter. IMHO, in that case the caller also creates the filter and it's only set on this input stream. Maybe we shouldn't have added the permission check there? Thanks Max > On Aug 23, 2018, at 4:55 AM, Sean Mullan wrote: > > One

Re: RFR (XS) 8209851 : Algorithm name is compared via reference identity

2018-08-23 Thread Sean Mullan
Looks fine to me. --Sean On 8/22/18 3:21 PM, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: Hello! In sun.security.provider.DSA.engineInitSign() a check for the key size is meant to be skipped if the MessageDigest is NullDigest20. However, the check for the algorithm's name is done via comparing with a String lite

Re: RFR: JDK-8209129 :Further improvements to cipher buffer management

2018-08-23 Thread Xuelei Fan
No idea. I may not use a printable character to zero a password. Xuelei On 8/23/2018 3:31 AM, Weijun Wang wrote: I have no more comment. As for fill(passwd, '\0'), maybe JVM can translate it to ZeroMemory() or memset(0). In fact, I don't know why originally it was fill(passwd, '0'). I can o

RE: RFR: 8209452: VerifyCACerts.java failed with "At least one cacert test failed" (gtecybertrustglobalca certificate)

2018-08-23 Thread Langer, Christoph
Hi Sean, thanks for the information. Can you please let me know when you've crated the Jira item for removal that I can add me as a watcher? Thanks & Best regards Christoph > -Original Message- > From: Sean Mullan > Sent: Mittwoch, 22. August 2018 15:41 > To: Langer, Christoph ; Rajan

Re: RFR: JDK-8209129 :Further improvements to cipher buffer management

2018-08-23 Thread Seán Coffey
I made those minor edits in the end and pushed the changes. We should examine usage of Arrays.fill(passwd, '0') in other parts of the JDK as a follow up. regards, Sean. On 22/08/2018 23:01, Seán Coffey wrote: On 22 August 2018 19:22:49 IST, Ivan Gerasimov wrote: Hi Seán! Just a minor com

Re: RFR: JDK-8209129 :Further improvements to cipher buffer management

2018-08-23 Thread Weijun Wang
I have no more comment. As for fill(passwd, '\0'), maybe JVM can translate it to ZeroMemory() or memset(0). In fact, I don't know why originally it was fill(passwd, '0'). I can only guess that it can still be printed out as a normal string and if someone misuse it there won't be a NPE. Who know