Re: Code Review Request for 7146728 and 7130959

2012-03-01 Thread Brad Wetmore
On 2/21/2012 5:33 PM, Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng wrote: Brad, Can you please review the fixes for the following 2 bugs: * 7146728: Inconsistent length for the generated secret using DH key agreement impl from SunJCE and PKCS11 o http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~valeriep/7146728/we

hg: jdk8/tl/jdk: 7149785: Minor corrections to ScriptEngineManager javadoc

2012-03-01 Thread ptisnovs
Changeset: 6eed7049d389 Author:ptisnovs Date: 2012-03-01 14:02 +0100 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/6eed7049d389 7149785: Minor corrections to ScriptEngineManager javadoc Summary: JavaDoc correction Reviewed-by: alanb Contributed-by: Pavel Tisnovsky ! src/share/cl

hg: jdk8/tl/jdk: 7149320: Move sun.misc.VM.booted() to the end of System.initializeSystemClass()

2012-03-01 Thread mike . duigou
Changeset: 971a86421f51 Author:mduigou Date: 2012-03-01 09:40 -0800 URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/971a86421f51 7149320: Move sun.misc.VM.booted() to the end of System.initializeSystemClass() Summary: Ensure that sun.misc.VM.booted() is the last action in System.in

Re: Code Review Request for 7146728 and 7130959

2012-03-01 Thread Valerie (Yu-Ching) Peng
Yes, that's the section that mentioned the generated secret having the same length as p. I guess it depends on how it's interpreted. The way I look at it is that if the generated secrets aren't of the same length, then whoever using this variant for deriving the keying material will need to do

Re: Code Review Request for 7146728 and 7130959

2012-03-01 Thread Michael StJohns
Hi Brad - The output of the DH calculation needs to preserve leading zeros. The RFC unfortunately doesn't specify the Integer to Byte conversion primitive, but both X9.42 and the equivalent text in NIST SP800-56A (appendix C.1) make it clear that the conversion from Integer to Byte string en

Re: Code Review Request for 7146728 and 7130959

2012-03-01 Thread Brad Wetmore
> RFC 2631 has not be crystal clear on this I am afraid, and > NIST SP800-56A (appendix C.1) make it clear Thanks, Mike/Valerie For the record, I wasn't disagreeing with the approach or the need to do this, just pointing out that RFC 2631 wasn't authoritative on the matter for the RAW opera

Re: Code Review Request for 7146728 and 7130959

2012-03-01 Thread Michael StJohns
Heh... by the way - this goes back to my previous email suggesting that the standard algorithms page have an entry for each algorithm that points to the specific standard you implement (or that should be implemented to claim compliance with the name). Later, Mike At 08:09 PM 3/1/2012, Brad W