Code review request, 7106773: 512 bits RSA key cannot work with SHA384 and SHA512

[Xuelei Fan]

The VPN is awesomely bad today.

The webrev in cr.openjdk is
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/7106773/webrev.01/

On 11/18/2011 7:39 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> Oh, there seems to be much more non-trivial code changes then the
> previous version of webrev.
> 
> I now focus on the utility class KeyLength.java:
> 
> In ReflectiveProvider, how about adding a "." at the end of package name?
> 
It's safer.

> Also, is the while loop really necessary in getKeyLengthMethod? Why not
> directly call getDeclaredMethod on the the baseClassName? If you want to
> make sure the current class is a subclass of the baseClassName, try
> isAssignableFrom.
> 
It's a little strange of the implement of getKeyLengthMethod() because
of the following causes:
1. Class.getDeclaredMethod() cannot return inherited methods.

2. Class.forName("sun.security.pkcs11.P11Key") is not reliable.
   The current class loader is not always able to find the P11Key class.
 As you saw in the previous webrev, I specified the class loader while
searching for the class:
   Class.forName("sun.security.pkcs11.P11Key", true,
                      key.getClass().getClassLoader());

   There is one assumption that every key will come from the same class
loader during the JVM life. So we can cache the loaded P11Key class.
It's a little risky.

   And more, it's OK when there is only one PKCS11 provider.  However,
while we adding MSCAPI in, we will have to look through both PKCS11
provider and MSCAPI provider in order to select the proper cached key
class. If we get a key from none of PKCS11 and MSCAPI, we will continue
calling the Class.forName() repeatedly until we are able to encounter
the PKCS11 key or MSCAPI key. It's very bad in performance.

   The calling in the getKeyLengthMethod() is lightweight, and we don't
have to worry about the class loader any more.

> As for the test, I was thinking that you can add a unit test on the
> KeyLength class itself.
> 
I may add some new and simple tests on KeyLength only.

Thanks,
Xuelei

> Thanks
> Max
> 
> 
> On 11/17/2011 11:14 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>> Sean, could you also review the fix? I plan to backport the fix to JDK
>> 7, so that the key size constraints for both JSSE and CertPath can work
>> with PKCS11 and MSCPI.
>>
>> updated webrev:
>> http://javaweb.us.oracle.com/~xf138604/bugbios/7106773/webrev.01/
>>
>> In the new webrev, I add a new KeyLength class under sun.security.util.
>> I think it may be useful for other models.
>>
>> On 11/11/2011 2:33 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>>> SSLContextVersion.java:
>>>
>>>     typo: suported ->  supported
>>>
>> Updated.
>>
>>> DisabledAlgorithmConstraints.java:
>>>
>>>     When can size == 0? Why it's not allowed?
>>>
>> It's a line of dummy code in case the get key size method return 0.
>>
>>>     Yes, I think the reflection calls should be wrapped in doPriv
>>>
>>>     Please also consider keys from MSCAPI
>>>
>> Support MSCAPI now.
>>
>>>     Try looking at sun.misc.SharedSecrets and see if it's better
>>>     for you. Probably not. That class is used to share non-public
>>>     methods in public classes. Not the same case here.
>>>
>>> SignatureAndHashAlgorithm.java:
>>>
>>>     Is it possible to combine expected and signingKey into a single
>>>     signingKey? Of course that means it might need to be never null
>>>     and all key alg call it in a consistent way. I wonder if this
>>>     is OK for you.
>>>
>> It not always work. For example, the key algorithm may be "EC", but the
>> expected algorithm may be "ECDSA".
>>
>>>     The RSAKey interface seems not used anywhere.
>>>
>> Yes, removed.
>>
>>>     How about changing
>>>
>>>      288 }   // Otherwise, cannot determine the key size, prefer the
>>> most
>>>      289     // perferable hash algorithm.
>>>
>>>     to
>>>
>>>      maxDigestLength = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
>>>
>>>     then you don't need to assign -1 and check for<  0 later.
>>>
>> Good point.
>>
>>>     I would be glad if lines 302-306 can be further indented 4 spaces
>>>
>>>     The comment on lines 268-273 is confusing, because you did calculate
>>>     maxDigestAlgorithm for 512 bits key later.
>>>
>>>     Personally, I prefer comments on 274-281 and codes on 284-288
>>>     to be from a smaller keySize to bigger ones, but everything is OK.
>>>
>> Updated.
>>
>>> Test:
>>>
>>>     I would like a unit test on
>>> DisabledAlgorithmConstraints::getKeySize.
>>>     Hopefully the test can cover all SecretKey and PrivateKey from all
>>>     providers with all keysizes.
>>>
>> Added some new tests for PKCS11 and MSCAPI.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Xuelei
>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Max
>>>
>>> On 11/11/2011 01:09 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>>>> Hi Weijun,
>>>>
>>>> Are you available to review my fix for CR 7106773? The fix in JSSE part
>>>> is straightforward in that the call to
>>>> SignatureAndHashAlgorithm.getPreferableAlgorithm() needs an additional
>>>> Key parameter for RSA key exchanges. The significant change is at
>>>> sun/security/util/DisabledAlgorithmConstraints.java. I modified the
>>>> code
>>>> in order to get the key size of the unextractable key in PKCS#11
>>>> device.
>>>>
>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/7106773/webrev.00/
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Xuelei
>>