On Sat, 20 Mar 2021 18:43:34 GMT, SalusaSecondus <github.com+829871+salusasecon...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Mike, >> >> From what I can find, if you try to get a spec from a non-extractable key >> you'll get an `InvalidKeySpecException`. >> 1. `C_GetAttributeValue`will throw a `PKCS11Exception` >> 2. The `PKCS11Exception` gets caught in >> [P11KeyFactory](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/jdk.crypto.cryptoki/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs11/P11KeyFactory.java#L98-L99) >> which rethrows it as an `InvalidKeySpecException`. > > We seem to have a choice and I'm not sure the best way to approach this. > > 1. We trust the properties in `P11Key` and just ask it if the values are both > sensitive and extractable. [1] > 2. But if we already trust P11Key, why not also trust that it properly > implements the RSAPrivateKey interfaces [2]. This is the strategy used by the > snippet I posted earlier (delegating to `implGetSoftwareFactory()`) > 3. We don't trust P11Key except to use getKeyId(), this yields the current > design where we pull the attributes every time the factory needs them. > > We should probably reduce calls to `C_GetAttributeValue` as they may be very > slow. At the least they cross the JNI boundary and at worst they interact > with a slow piece of hardware (possibly over a network). The current design > will have two calls in a worst case, but is likely to have only one call the > vast majority of the time. > > [1] > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/jdk.crypto.cryptoki/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs11/P11Key.java#L92 > [2] > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/src/jdk.crypto.cryptoki/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs11/P11Key.java#L375-L406 P11PrivateKey is private so we cannot check that. Our options to figure out if something is sensitive are: 1. See if it doesn't implement `RSAPrivateKey` (this yields the prior snippet with `implGetSoftwareFactory()`) 2. Try to access the attributes directly from the token (this yields the current solution which we're modifying) 3. Check the value of `p11Key.extractable` (which is package-private and thus visible) The smallest change would be to keep our strategy as 2. While I like it the least (my favorite is number 1) it has the smallest risk of changing some undocumented behavior on a PKCS#11 device that we're unfamiliar with (and not testing because we may not have the hardware costing tens of thousands of dollars). Option 3 somewhat spits the difference between 1 and 2. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2949
