On Wed, 3 Jan 2024 20:39:57 GMT, Ben Perez <d...@openjdk.org> wrote: >> Refactored PKCS9Attribute to use a hash map instead of multiple arrays. The >> key for the hash map is an `ObjectIdentifier` and the values are a record >> `AttributeInfo` that stores the information previously contained in the >> arrays `PKCS9_VALUE_TAGS`, `VALUE_CLASSES`, and `SINGLE_VALUED`. >> >> It seems as though we should be able to get rid of constants such as >> `EMAIL_ADDRESS_OID` since they aren't heavily used with the hash map >> approach, but since the values are public it might cause compatibility >> issues. >> >> Another question is how to handle `RSA DSI`, `S/MIME`, >> `Extended-certificate`, and `Issuer Serial Number` OIDs. The prior version >> threw an error but in this refactor they are treated as an "unknown OID" and >> only throw a debug warning. This was addressed in >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8011867 but prior to this refactor the >> aforementioned OIDs were treated differently than unknown OIDs. > > Ben Perez has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Minor fixes to make the code more readable, inlined init(), removed > PKCS9Attributes.getAttributes()
There are some existing regression tests in the `test/jdk/sun/security/pkcs/pkcs9` directory. I would look through those to see if it would be useful to add more test cases to make sure the code is being adequately tested. src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs/PKCS9Attribute.java line 321: > 319: > 320: this.oid = oid; > 321: info = oidMap.get(oid); Nit: Change to `this.info` to be consistent with other fields. src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs/PKCS9Attribute.java line 321: > 319: > 320: this.oid = oid; > 321: info = oidMap.get(oid); What if `info` is `null` (there is no entry for the specified OID)? The prior code set the value class to `byte[]` in that case. I think we want to preserve that behavior. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17132#issuecomment-1877768541 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17132#discussion_r1442246539 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17132#discussion_r1442250877
