Re: RFR [14] JDK-8226374 Restrict signature algorithms and named groups

On 7/25/2019 7:23 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: Is it possible to add one group name and one signature scheme to the Example in java.security? Good point. I will add the items for each in the example in the next webrev. Thanks, Xuelei --Max On Jul 25, 2019, at 11:45 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: I u

Re: RFR [14] JDK-8226374 Restrict signature algorithms and named groups

Is it possible to add one group name and one signature scheme to the Example in java.security? --Max > On Jul 25, 2019, at 11:45 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: > > I updated the CSR and webrev per the review comments accordingly. > > webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8226374/webrev.02/ > CSR:

Re: RFR: 8191138: Remove deprecated java.security.acl APIs

On 7/25/19 9:15 AM, Sean Mullan wrote: Please review this change to remove the deprecated java.security.acl APIs. These APIs have long had a warning in the javadocs (since at least JDK 1.3.1 and possibly earlier) indicating that they were superseded by other APIs. They were initially depreca

Re: RFR [14] JDK-8226374 Restrict signature algorithms and named groups

On 7/25/19 11:45 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote: I updated the CSR and webrev per the review comments accordingly. webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8226374/webrev.02/ Not done reviewing yet, but here are a couple of comments so far: * test/jdk/sun/security/ssl/CipherSuite/RestrictNamedGroup.j

RFR: 8191138: Remove deprecated java.security.acl APIs

Please review this change to remove the deprecated java.security.acl APIs. These APIs have long had a warning in the javadocs (since at least JDK 1.3.1 and possibly earlier) indicating that they were superseded by other APIs. They were initially deprecated in JDK 9 and marked for removal in JDK

Re: RFR [14] JDK-8226374 Restrict signature algorithms and named groups

I updated the CSR and webrev per the review comments accordingly. webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8226374/webrev.02/ CSR:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8227445 Thanks, Xuelei On 7/12/2019 9:14 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote: On 7/12/2019 5:24 AM, Sean Mullan wrote: On 7/11/19 1

Re: [13] RFR 8228456: Enhance tests after JDK-8217375

Hi Philipp, Most are fine but PreserveRawManifestEntryAndDigest.java is still very slow and fails intermittently. The problem is due to jarsignerProc(). Since you have parallel=true for the test providers, many jarsigner processes would run at the same time and some of our test machines cannot

Re: [13] RFR 8228602: Add sun/security/tools/jarsigner/PreserveRawManifestEntryAndDigest.java to problem list

> On Jul 25, 2019, at 7:35 PM, Sean Mullan wrote: > > Can you add some more info to the bug and also add links to the 2 bugs you > mention below? OK. > Also, should the subcomponent for this and 8228431 be "java.security"? jarsigner is based on jdk.security.jarsigner.JarSigner. And do we

Re: [13] RFR 8228456: Enhance tests after JDK-8217375

On 7/24/19 8:27 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: On Jul 24, 2019, at 11:30 PM, Sean Mullan wrote: On 7/21/19 10:02 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: Please take a review at http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8228456/webrev.00/ The change is contributed by Philipp Kunz. Since we are now in RDP 2 and we are

RFR[13] JDK-8228403: SignTwice.java failed with java.io.FileNotFoundException: File name too long

Hi, The Java runtime version of JDK builds may be long, then the path to the generated jars, which use this version as part of file name, would be too long. This fix takes the jar names to use Java version, which should be much shorter. Now, the report table displays the Java versions and the

Re: [13] RFR 8228602: Add sun/security/tools/jarsigner/PreserveRawManifestEntryAndDigest.java to problem list

Can you add some more info to the bug and also add links to the 2 bugs you mention below? Also, should the subcomponent for this and 8228431 be "java.security"? Otherwise it looks ok. --Sean On 7/24/19 11:32 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: The new test introduced by JDK-8217375

Re: RFR : [XS] 8228578: fix CFData object leak in macosx KeystoreImpl.m

I don't think so. --Max > On Jul 25, 2019, at 5:09 PM, Baesken, Matthias > wrote: > > Thanks for the review . > Do I need a second review for this one ? > > > Best regards, Matthias > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Weijun Wang >> Sent: Mittwoch, 24. Juli 2019 15:41 >> To: Baesk

RE: RFR : [XS] 8228578: fix CFData object leak in macosx KeystoreImpl.m

Thanks for the review . Do I need a second review for this one ? Best regards, Matthias > -Original Message- > From: Weijun Wang > Sent: Mittwoch, 24. Juli 2019 15:41 > To: Baesken, Matthias > Cc: security-dev@openjdk.java.net; naoto.s...@oracle.com > Subject: Re: RFR : [XS] 8228578: