On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 13:33:53 GMT, Matthias Baesken wrote:
> After 8278449, we seem to ignore in the call
>
> ` if (SecTrustSettingsCopyTrustSettings(certRef,
> kSecTrustSettingsDomainUser, &trustSettings) == errSecItemNotFound) `
>
> all trusted certs from admin and system domains, so a lot mo
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:45:06 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
>> `java.base` (compared to those in
>> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
>
> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request inc
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:49:48 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
> Fixes: [JDK-8294985](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294985)
Is [JDK-8294985](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294985) in JBS a closed
bug?
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13466#issuecomment-1507925845
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:49:48 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
> Fixes: [JDK-8294985](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294985)
Please update the copyright date to include "2022, 2023,"
Otherwise, LGTM.
-
Marked as reviewed by wetmore (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 22:36:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEMSpi.java line 119:
>>
>>> 117: * of {@code from} and {@code to} are within the correct range.
>>> 118: * Therefore an implementation of this method does not need to
>>> 119:
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:59:17 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> spec change, getAlgorithm
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 168:
>
>> 166: *
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:35:23 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> spec change, getAlgorithm
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 246:
>
>> 244:
>> 245: /**
Hiya,
On 13/04/2023 23:35, Weijun Wang wrote:
Apologies for the interruption from the sidelines but I have a
query if that's ok.
Is there any relationship between this work and RFC1980 which
defines HPKE, being a way of encrypting to a public value using a
KEM?
We know about HPKE,
Of cou
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 21:46:22 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> spec change, getAlgorithm
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEMSpi.java line 119:
>
>> 117: *
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 22:29:34 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
>
> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> spec ch
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
spec change, getAlgorithm
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.o
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 79:
> 77:
> 78: /**
> 79: * Type for the return value of the {@
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
Changes requested by xuelei (Reviewer).
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEMSpi.java line 119:
> 117: * of {@c
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 19:01:24 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> Currently, `provider()` is a method of `KEM.Encapsulator`. If `KEMSpi.
>> newEncapsulator` also returns this interface, then what value should its
>> `provider()` method return? This is what I meant registering itself to a
>> provi
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:58:56 GMT, Matthew Donovan wrote:
> Implemented tests for the `DomCryptoContext.iterator()` method.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 76cda9f4
Author:Matthew Donovan
Committer: Rajan Halade
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/76cda9f44
Hi,
Apologies for the interruption from the sidelines but I
have a query if that's ok.
Is there any relationship between this work and RFC1980
which defines HPKE, being a way of encrypting to a public
value using a KEM?
Reason to ask is HPKE is a mechanism that'll be needed for
TLS Encrypted C
On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:31:32 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> There are references to other specifications missing, like NIST Special
> Publication 800-90A Revision 1, referenced in `java.security.DrbgParameters`.
> I think there are others, I haven't done a thorough review yet. Will there be
> subseq
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:58:56 GMT, Matthew Donovan wrote:
> Implemented tests for the `DomCryptoContext.iterator()` method.
Marked as reviewed by mullan (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13445#pullrequestreview-1384121238
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 19:57:16 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Implemented tests for the `DomCryptoContext.iterator()` method.
>
> Marked as reviewed by mullan (Reviewer).
> LGTM. @seanjmullan let us know if you have any comments?
LGTM.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/1344
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 17:54:22 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> Currently, `provider()` is a method of `KEM.Encapsulator`. If `KEMSpi.
> newEncapsulator` also returns this interface, then what value should its
> `provider()` method return? This is what I meant registering itself to a
> provider.
>
> W
Fixes: [JDK-8294985](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8294985)
-
Commit messages:
- fixes JDK-8294985: throw an SSLException wrapping the IAE
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13466/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=13466&range=00
Issue: https://bu
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:21:51 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 519:
>
>> 517: * @param pk the receiver's public key, must not
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:29:23 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
> All known implementors of this interface were removed in
> [JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: b60604e8
Author:Kevin Driver
Committer: Sean Mullan
URL:
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 493:
> 491: * Creates a KEM encapsulator.
> 492: *
> 493:
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 18:12:09 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 1:
>
>> 1: /*
>
> Did you consider adding a `getAlgorithm` method?
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 1:
> 1: /*
Did you consider adding a `getAlgorithm` method? Most (all?)
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 17:35:00 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> `DHKEM.java` is the implementation, and it does not know which provider it
>> will be put into. It's inside the provider that calls `putService` or `put`
>> to add an implementation there, not that the implementation registered
>>
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 17:10:01 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> `DHKEM.java` is the implementation, and it does not know which provider it
> will be put into. It's inside the provider that calls `putService` or `put`
> to add an implementation there, not that the implementation registered itself
> in a
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 17:08:44 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 430:
>
>> 428: /**
>> 429: * Returns a {@code KEM} object t
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 430:
> 428: /**
> 429: * Returns a {@code KEM} object that imple
On Wed, 12 Apr 2023 13:58:56 GMT, Matthew Donovan wrote:
> Implemented tests for the `DomCryptoContext.iterator()` method.
LGTM. @seanjmullan let us know if you have any comments?
-
Marked as reviewed by rhalade (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13445#pullreq
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 02:51:28 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan wrote:
>> If the interface is only in `KEM`, then it needs a `provider()` method, but
>> an implementation actually does not know what the provider is. An
>> implementation can be registered in any (or even multiple) providers.
>
>> If the in
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 02:25:04 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> The KEM API and DHKEM impl. Note that this PR uses new methods in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/13250.
src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KEM.java line 36:
> 34:
> 35: /**
> 36: * The Key Encapsulation Mechanism.
How about
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 16:05:29 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
>> All known implementors of this interface were removed in
>> [JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
>
> Kevin Driver has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
> commits have been removed. The increm
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 16:05:29 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
>> All known implementors of this interface were removed in
>> [JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
>
> Kevin Driver has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
> commits have been removed. The increm
On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 15:29:23 GMT, Kevin Driver wrote:
> All known implementors of this interface were removed in
> [JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
> @driverkt Please do not rebase or force-push to an active PR as it
> invalidates existing review comments. Note for f
> All known implementors of this interface were removed in
> [JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
Kevin Driver has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
commits have been removed. The incremental views will show differences compared
to the previous con
All known implementors of this interface were removed in
[JDK-8029886](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8029886).
-
Commit messages:
- removed unused interface
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13464/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=13464&range=00
IIUC there is no place to add a reviewer's name. As long as you follow the
steps in https://openjdk.org/guide/#release-notes, someone reviews it, and the
state becomes Delivered, I think it's done.
Thanks,
Weijun
> On Apr 13, 2023, at 7:14 AM, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote:
>
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:5
On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 18:50:42 GMT, Eirik Bjorsnos wrote:
>> The `-altsigner` and `-altsignerpath` options in JarSigner with the
>> underlying `ContentSigner` mechanism were deprected in Java 9, for removal
>> in Java 15. See [JDK-8076535](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8076535),
>> [JDK-824
40 matches
Mail list logo
