On 14/09/2018 12:31, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Maybe it would be less confusing if the property was named -Djdk.disableSecurityManager, because AFAICT, it's what it does?
Forget I said that ;-) The name "jdk.allowSecurityManager" is actually fine. I was also confused at first because I believed the property, if set to false, would just prevent someone to call System::setSecurityManager at runtime, whereas it also prevents to set a security manager on the command line. Maybe emphasizing this would remove any confusion. I wonder if the VM should fail to start if both -Djdk.allowSecurityManager=false and -Djava.security.manager are supplied? best regards and apologies for the noise of my previous mail... -- daniel
