[8] RFR (S): 8033278: Missed access checks for Lookup.unreflect* after 8032585

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Paul,

The transformation you suggest is equivalent, but I reluctant to apply 
it. IMO, it doesn't add much value and current version is easier to 
read. Considering the current level of complexity in 
VA.isMemberAccessible I don't want to increase it even further :-)

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

PS: thanks for looking into the fix.

On 1/31/14 1:31 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>
> On Jan 31, 2014, at 1:58 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8033278/webrev.00/
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8033278
>>
>> The fix for 8032585 [1] introduced a regression: in some cases access check on a reference class is omitted.
>>
>> The fix is to ensure that access check on a reference class is always performed.
>>
>
>   104         case PROTECTED:
>   105             if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED_OR_PACKAGE_ALLOWED) != 0 &&
>   106                 isSamePackage(defc, lookupClass))
>   107                 return true;
>   108             if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED) == 0)
>   109                 return false;
>   110             if ((mods & STATIC) != 0 &&
>   111                 !isRelatedClass(refc, lookupClass))
>   112                 return false;
>   113             if ((allowedModes & PROTECTED) != 0 &&
>   114                 isSuperClass(defc, lookupClass))
>   115                 return true;
>   116             return false;
>
> Can lines 113 to 116 be reduced to:
>
>    return isSuperClass(defc, lookupClass));
>
> ?
>
> The shuffling of the code looks correct (and simpler), but i am fuzzy on the nuances of access control.
>
> Paul.
>
>> Testing: regression test, jdk/test/java/lang/invoke/, jdk/test/java/util/stream, vm.defmeth.testlist, vm.mlvm.testlist, nashorn (unit tests, octane), groovy
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> [1] http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8032585/webrev.00/
>