[7u80] Request for approval for CR 4963723: Implement SHA-224

[Rob McKenna]

Code changes generally require two approvals: codereview, performed by a 
reviewer, (in this case from security-dev) and push approval, performed 
by a gatekeeper. Given your email template matches the push approval 
template I understood that you intended the latter. Generally speaking 
codereview requests would say "Request for review" as opposed to 
"Request for approval" so a reviewer could overlook your mail if you 
intended the former.

     -Rob

On 18/09/14 00:21, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Sorry to be a pest, but given the scope of the change I'd feel more
>> comfortable with an explicit codereview for the backport.
>>
>>       -Rob
>>
>> On 17/09/14 18:32, Andrew Hughes wrote:
>>> This is the first of three backports to 7u designed to retain SSL
>>> compatibility with servers implemented in other languages switching
>>> to larger key sizes (notably DH >=2048 in Apache 2.4.7 [0]).
>>>
>>> This patch is a per-requisite of the patch which brings NSA Suite B
>>> support to 7. It applies largely unchanged, bar the following:
>>>
>>> * Copyright header adjustment
>>> * Removal of change to java.security.spec.MGF1ParameterSpec to avoid
>>> introducing a new public variable. The SHA-224 variant is constructed
>>> directly in com.sun.crypto.provider.OAEPParameters instead.
>>> * A change to OAEPParameters is dropped as it was already incorporated
>>> in the backport of 7180907 & 8049480 (addition of SHA-224 to
>>> convertToStandardName)
>>>
>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-4963723
>>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~andrew/jdk7u/4963723/webrev.01/
>>>
>>> [0] https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.4/mod/mod_ssl.html
>>>
>>> Ok to push?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>
> Which is what I asked for, no?
>
> If I wasn't waiting on a review first, I'd have pushed the change.