On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 05:01:03 GMT, Leonid Mesnik wrote:
>> The fix add remaining classes to the testlibrary jar and fix some warnings
>> in security-related classes.
>
> Leonid Mesnik has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Update ma
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 18:47:54 GMT, Ferenc Rakoczi wrote:
>> By using the aarch64 vector registers the speed of the computation of the
>> ML-DSA algorithms (key generation, document signing, signature verification)
>> can be approximately doubled.
>
> Ferenc Rakoczi has updated the pull request in
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 17:50:21 GMT, Mikhail Yankelevich wrote:
> Refactored the runNameEquals.sh to java test
test/jdk/sun/security/krb5/Krb5NameEquals.java line 94:
> 92:
> 93: if (installationIssue) {
> 94: System.out.println("""
You should probably
On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 16:23:59 GMT, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
> This takes a few test classes and moves them away from their current location
> in `test/jdk/java/security/testlibrary` to `test/lib/jdk/test/lib/security`,
> grouping them together with many other existing test utility classes. It
> also
Refactored the runNameEquals.sh to java test
-
Commit messages:
- 8349534: Refactor jdk/sun/security/krb5/runNameEquals.sh to java test
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23542/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=23542&range=00
Issue: https://bugs.openj
On Sun, 9 Feb 2025 05:32:10 GMT, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
>> This takes a few test classes and moves them away from their current
>> location in `test/jdk/java/security/testlibrary` to
>> `test/lib/jdk/test/lib/security`, grouping them together with many other
>> existing test utility classes. It a
On Sat, 8 Feb 2025 08:44:04 GMT, Shaojin Wen wrote:
>> You could define the static field on another class, like SecurityConstants,
>> and then use it in the enum constructor.
>
> Creating a new empty string array every time is the original behavior, which
> has nothing to do with the purpose of
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 06:46:45 GMT, Konanki Sreenath wrote:
>> Earlier code will trigger NPE if the certificate does not contain the
>> extensions or if the requested extensions does not exist. The better
>> approach for hardening **getExtensionValue** here is to to check for NULL
>> explicitly
