On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:20:13 GMT, Kevin Driver <kdri...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KDF.java line 413:
>>
>>> 411: * algorithm
>>> 412: * @throws InvalidAlgorithmParameterException
>>> 413: * if the {@code KDFParameters} is an invalid value
>>
>> I don't think "invalid value" is right here, that sound more like it is not
>> an object and has a value. Changing it to "if the {@code KDFParameters} are
>> invalid" would be sufficient, but I think the text should be consistent, so
>> in that case it should be "if the {@code KDFParameters} are inappropriate
>> for this {@code KDF}." (that is the wording you use in the `KDFSpi` ctor).
>>
>> Same comment for all methods in `KDF` that take `KDFParameters`.
>
> @seanjmullan: Addressed in
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/20301/commits/59a3f02015f7fc3ad81ca29b90d83b1c9bd70fc5.
> Please resolve this conversation if satisfied.
Well, I am not too sure if we should state it this way as we have no way to
tell if the KDF parameters are valid or not since KDF class is not coded with
algorithm-specific knowledge to validate it. How about we just simply state
that no providers supporting the requested KDFSpi implementations accepting it?
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20301#discussion_r1715736873
