On 01/11/2012 06:02 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: > On 1/11/2012 5:50 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >> Hi Andrew >> >> Take a brief look at the webrev. Looks like this Lengthable thing is the >> only change after your previous webrev. Please confirm. >> > Yes. > >> But I want something bigger. I would like to know if it is possible to >> add this keysize() method deep down into the very basic Key interface. >> If Key can have a method called getEncoded() I think this means it >> normally has a concrete form and surely has a publicly acceptable >> keysize() attribute. In JDK 8 we have default implementation for new >> interface methods. Is this issue a good candidate? >> > As Key is an java interface, we may not be able to add one more method > for compatibility reason. We may export the "Lengthable"/"Measurable" > interface in JDK 8. It's possible to implement Lengthable in all > sub-classes of Key in Oracle provider, but as would involve too many > changes. As we need to backport this fix into JDK 7, I think we'd better > consider the big picture in the future.
Then I think the previous webrev is enough for JDK 7, and for JDK 8, we simply add a new keysize() method to Key. Max > >> At least, in KeyLength::getKeySize(), I would like to see "if (key >> instanceof Lengthable)" to be the first check, and, if possible, the >> only one needed, at least for keys from providers built in JDK. >> > It's OK to check it at first. But as we also need to support other > providers, I think we'd better also check other types of instance. > > Thanks, > Xuelei > >> Thanks >> Max >> >> >> On 01/11/2012 08:57 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote: >>> "Measurable" looks like a better name. I will update the name in the >>> next webrev after this round of code review: >>> >>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/7106773/webrev.04/ >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Xuelei >>> >>> On 1/10/2012 11:47 PM, Vincent Ryan wrote: >>>> On 01/10/12 03:19 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: >>>>> On 1/10/2012 11:09 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >>>>>> It's late night and I'll read it tomorrow. But can you choose another >>>>>> word instead of Lengthable? Length is not a verb. >>>>>> >>>>> ;-) The name took me a lot of time, searching by google, dictionary, and >>>>> any possible English translation. I have to agree that I failed to find >>>>> a suitable name. I tried hardly to persuade myself that "lengthable" is >>>>> also used by someother application code, so it might not too bad to use >>>>> it here. >>>>> >>>>> With the word "lengthable", I want to express that the length is >>>>> measurable. Any suggestion for the better one? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Measurable ;-) >>>> >>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Xuelei >>>>> >>>>>> Max >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>> 发件人: Xuelei Fan >>>>>> 发送时间: 2012/1/10 22:51 >>>>>> 收件人: Weijun Wang >>>>>> 抄送: OpenJDK >>>>>> 主题: Re: Code review request, 7106773: 512 bits RSA key cannot work >>>>>> withSHA384 and SHA512 >>>>>> >>>>>> It has been around 50 days passed since the last day we talked about the >>>>>> issue. Hope you can recall it from the deep memory. ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> webrev: http://javaweb.us.oracle.com/~xufan/bugbios/7106773/webrev.04/ >>>>>> >>>>>> In this update, as we agreed, a new Oracle private interface was >>>>>> introduced: sun.security.util.Lengthable, and Lengthable.length() is >>>>>> defined to get the length an object. sun.security.pkcs11.P11Key and >>>>>> sun.security.mscapi.Key will implements the interface. As will easy and >>>>>> speedup (comparing with reflection approach) the getting of key length >>>>>> of those unextractable keys in hardware device. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the webrev, I should also include another two signed jars, >>>>>> sunpkcs11.jar and sunmscapi.jar. I will include them when I get the >>>>>> official signed jars. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Xuelei >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/22/2011 8:41 AM, Weijun Wang wrote: >>>>>>> I really like this one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> Max >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/21/2011 08:05 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> How about this approach? This looks very safe. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I also prefer this approach, although it need more updates in PKCS11 >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> MSCPI source code. If you vote for this approach, I will try to >>>>>>>> implement it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >
