Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v11]

2025-05-26 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a r

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v10]

2025-05-16 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v9]

2025-04-29 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge o

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v8]

2025-04-25 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v7]

2025-04-24 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit s

Re: RFR: 8349910: Implement HTTP/3 for the HTTP Client API

2025-04-23 Thread Michael McMahon
On Fri, 18 Apr 2025 18:47:52 GMT, Chen Liang wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Please find here a PR for the implementation of JEP [JDK-8291976: HTTP/3 for >> the HTTP Client API](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8291976). >> >> The CSR can be viewed at [JDK-8350588: Implement HTTP/3 for the HTTP Client

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v6]

2025-04-15 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v5]

2025-04-15 Thread Michael McMahon
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 14:20:39 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> update to minimise code changes > > test/jdk/java/net/URI/Test.java line 29: >

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v5]

2025-04-15 Thread Michael McMahon
On Mon, 14 Apr 2025 13:51:30 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> update to minimise code changes > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/

Re: RFR: 8353642: Deprecate URL::getPermission method and networking permission classes for removal [v3]

2025-04-11 Thread Michael McMahon
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 13:56:18 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Please find her a patch that deprecate networking permission classes for >> removal. The method `URL::getPermission` now serves little purpose and is >> also deprecated. That method was overridden in subclasses and specified to >> retur

Re: RFR: 8353642: Deprecate networking permission classes for removal [v2]

2025-04-11 Thread Michael McMahon
On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:01:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Please find her a patch that deprecate networking permission classes for >> removal. The method `URL::getPermission` now serves little purpose and is >> also deprecated. That method was overridden in subclasses and specified to >> retur

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v5]

2025-04-10 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 21:26:21 GMT, Michael McMahon wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Enhanced exception messages are designed to hide sensitive information such >> as hostnames, IP >> addresses from exception message strings, unless the enhanced mode for the >> speci

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v5]

2025-04-10 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit si

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v4]

2025-04-09 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge o

RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages

2025-03-15 Thread Michael McMahon
Hi, Enhanced exception messages are designed to hide sensitive information such as hostnames, IP addresses from exception message strings, unless the enhanced mode for the specific category has been explicitly enabled. Enhanced exceptions were first introduced in 8204233 in JDK 11 and update

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v3]

2025-03-07 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commi

Re: RFR: 8348986: Improve coverage of enhanced exception messages [v2]

2025-03-06 Thread Michael McMahon
om the message text. > > The changes to the java.security conf file describe the exact changes in > terms of the categories now > supported and any changes in behavior. > > Thanks, > Michael Michael McMahon has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commi

Re: RFR: 8328914: Document the java.security.debug property in javadoc [v3]

2025-02-20 Thread Michael McMahon
On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:27:19 GMT, Koushik Muthukrishnan Thirupattur wrote: >> java.security.debug is a widely used debug system property for JDK security >> libs. It's time to capture details about this property via javadoc. >> >> ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/bf8bb8bf-a6

Re: RFR: 8344228: Revisit SecurityManager usage in java.net.http after JEP 486 integration

2024-11-14 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024 20:40:46 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Please find here a patch that cleans up the java.net.http module code to > remove permission checks and doPriviliged calls. > This was mostly mechanical. Great cleanup! Good to see a lot of complicated cruft being removed. src/java.net.ht

Re: RFR: 8338411: Implement JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security Manager [v3]

2024-10-25 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 13:19:55 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote: >> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security >> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The >> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the >> main ch

Re: RFR: 8338411: Implement JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security Manager [v2]

2024-10-22 Thread Michael McMahon
On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:03:30 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote: >> This is the implementation of JEP 486: Permanently Disable the Security >> Manager. See [JEP 486](https://openjdk.org/jeps/486) for more details. The >> [CSR](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338412) describes in detail the >> main ch

Re: RFR: JDK-8327474 Review use of java.io.tmpdir in jdk tests [v3]

2024-03-26 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 17:13:46 GMT, Bill Huang wrote: >> This task addresses an essential aspect of our testing infrastructure: the >> proper handling and cleanup of temporary files and socket files created >> during test execution. The motivation behind these changes is to prevent the >> accumu

Re: HttpURLConnection cache issues leading to crashes in JGSS w/ native GSS introduced by 8303809

2023-10-23 Thread Michael McMahon
Hi, Thanks for bringing this to our attention. You are right that this is a misuse of the authentication cache in the case of Kerberos (Negotiate) authentication. Though that is not the case for other auth schemes, because normally what gets cached are credentials, rather than security tokens

Re: [jdk21] RFR: 8304885: Reuse stale data to improve DNS resolver resiliency

2023-06-23 Thread Michael McMahon
> > The commit being backported was authored by Sergey Bylokhov on 9 Jun 2023 and > was reviewed by Michael McMahon and Daniel Fuchs. > > CSR is approved for JDK 21: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8306653 > "jdk21-enhancement-yes" label is added to the JBS. &

Re: RFR: 7065228: To interpret case-insensitive string locale independently [v2]

2023-05-19 Thread Michael McMahon
On Wed, 17 May 2023 13:53:55 GMT, Darragh Clarke wrote: >> Updated instances of `toLowerCase` and `toUpperCase` in several net and io >> files to specify `Locale.ROOT` to ensure that case conversion issues don't >> occur, >> >> I didn't add any new tests but ran tier 1-3 with no issues > > Dar

Re: RFR: 7065228: To interpret case-insensitive string locale independently [v2]

2023-05-19 Thread Michael McMahon
On Wed, 17 May 2023 13:53:55 GMT, Darragh Clarke wrote: >> Updated instances of `toLowerCase` and `toUpperCase` in several net and io >> files to specify `Locale.ROOT` to ensure that case conversion issues don't >> occur, >> >> I didn't add any new tests but ran tier 1-3 with no issues > > Dar

Re: RFR: 8294241: Deprecate URL public constructors [v4]

2022-11-03 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 11:20:03 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI` >> to parse or construct any URL. >> >> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components >> according to the escaping mechanism define

Re: RFR: 8294241: Deprecate URL public constructors [v4]

2022-11-03 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 10:56:28 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI` >> to parse or construct any URL. >> >> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components >> according to the escaping mechanism define

Re: RFR: 8294241: Deprecate URL public constructors

2022-10-27 Thread Michael McMahon
On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 05:14:19 GMT, ExE Boss wrote: >> src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/JarURLConnection.java line 177: >> >>> 175: @SuppressWarnings("deprecation") >>> 176: var tmp = jarFileURL = new URL(spec.substring(0, separator++)); >>> 177: >> >> I realise that @Suppres

Re: RFR: 8294241: Deprecate URL public constructors

2022-10-26 Thread Michael McMahon
On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 16:00:56 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI` > to parse or construct any URL. > > The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components > according to the escaping mechanism defined in

Re: RFR: 8295470: Update openjdk.java.net => openjdk.org URLs in test code

2022-10-18 Thread Michael McMahon
On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 11:55:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > This is a continuation of the effort to update all our URLs to the new > top-level domain. > > This patch updates (most) URLs in testing code. There still exists references > to openjdk.java.net, but that are not strictly used as no

Re: RFR: 8289768: Clean up unused code [v3]

2022-07-11 Thread Michael McMahon
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 07:08:46 GMT, Daniel JeliƄski wrote: >> This patch removes many unused variables and one unused label reported by >> the compilers when relevant warnings are enabled. >> >> The unused code was found by compiling after removing `unused` from the list >> of disabled warnings