On 6/6/2018 1:11 PM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
I can make the below changes if they are accepted.

Please take care of the update, except the fragmentSize for InputRecord.java.

Tony
------

InputRecord.java
- Optimize Imports
- fragmentSize appears not to be used.  It is constructed,
it can be set by changeFragmentSize.  MaxFragExtension even calls these methods, but no where can I find that uses the fragmentSize.  It appears the fragment sizes are either calculated in the SSLCipher or the negotiatedMaxFragLen is used in the handshakeSession.

I need more time for this point.

65: getHelloVersion() is unused

- For the below, I would assume integer overflow isn't an issue since these are all internal APIs and the worse we would see is an Out of Bounds exception

337:   for (int i = offset, j = 0;
338:        i < (offset + length) && j < headerSize; i++) {

359:        for (int i = offset; i < offset + length; i++) {

373:        for (int i = offset; i < offset + length; i++) {

Yes. These integers have been checked before calling into this method.



DTLSInputRecord.java
- Optimize Imports
102         } else if (srcsLength == 1) {
103             return decode(srcs[srcsOffset]);

shouldn't it be decode(srcs[0]); otherwise it could be out of bounds.

The 'srcsLength' refer to the length from the offset. I think srcsOffset should be used as the index.



SSLEngineInputRecord.java
- Optimize Imports
41:  prevType never used
347: srcLimit never used

42 & 43:  hsMsgOff and hsMsgLim are set to 0 and never change, later they are used in a check with themselves:
      232:  if ( ... && hsMsgOff != hsMsgLen) {

I missed the cleanup. hsMsgOff and hsMsgLen are not used any more. "hsMsgOff != hsMsgLen" may be replaced with something like handshakeBuffer.hasRemaining() or similar.



SSLSocketInputRecord.java
- Optimize Imports
47: prevType never used
48 & 49:  nsMsgOff and hsMsgLim are set to 0 and never change, later they are used in a check with themselves:
      266:  if ( ... && hsMsgOff != hsMsgLen) {

As above.

Thanks,
Xuelei

Reply via email to