On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 20:44:30 GMT, Jamil Nimeh <jni...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Anthony Scarpino has updated the pull request with a new target base due to >> a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 58 commits: >> >> - Merge branch 'pem-merge' into pem >> - merge >> - Merge in PEMRecord as part of the API. >> - Merge branch 'pem-record' into pem-merge >> >> # Conflicts: >> # src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/PEMDecoder.java >> # src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/PEMRecord.java >> # src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/util/Pem.java >> # test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMData.java >> # test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMDecoderTest.java >> # test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMEncoderTest.java >> - Merge branch 'master' into pem-record >> >> # Conflicts: >> # src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/javac/PreviewFeature.java >> - test fixes & cleanup >> - Implement stream decoding >> fix StringBuffer/Builder >> X509C* changes >> - Reorg tests data >> minor fixes >> - merge from pem branch >> - Merge branch 'pem' into pem-record >> >> # Conflicts: >> # src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/PEMEncoder.java >> # src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/provider/X509Factory.java >> # src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/util/Pem.java >> # test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMDecoderTest.java >> # test/jdk/java/security/PEM/PEMEncoderTest.java >> - ... and 48 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/22845a77...cc952c0b > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/PEMRecord.java line 53: > >> 51: * instantiation of this record. >> 52: * >> 53: * @param type The type identifier in the PEM header. For a public key, > > Since there are specific strings that will be needed in the `type` field, is > there a pointer we could add so folks looking at this could see what values > might be acceptable for this field. I don't know if right here is the right > place for it, but maybe a see-also or something? Or is this left open-ended > to support whatever could exist in a PEM header? As `PEMRecord` is a generic object containing PEM formatted data, the `type` field (aka header/footer) does not have any checking. PEM data that have cryptographic objects in the Java API will by default decoded to those. Any other header will returned as a `PEMRecord`. A PEM header type not in the specification could be use with a `PEMRecord` for encoding or decoding, but I don't see that as a problem. Putting in restrictions doesn't make the API any better or usable given it is a generic "catch-all" object. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17543#discussion_r2010963419
