7054637 closed/lib/security/cacerts/VerifyCACerts.java failed on solaris 11

Michael StJohns mstjohns at comcast.net
Fri Sep 23 17:24:28 PDT 2011


At 04:13 PM 9/23/2011, Vincent Ryan wrote:
>On 09/23/11 05:41 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:
>> Heh - I thought this looked familiar.  
>> 
>> Please take a look at my comments in bug 6763530, especially the fix for P11Key around line 1017.  
>> 
>
>I didn't see any comments from you in bug 6763530?

The 29 November comments are from me.




>> Would it make sense to back out the fix that was put into P11Key to fix that bug in favor of a provider based solution (e.g. same boolean check)?   
>> 
>
>I think the flexibility to decode either format regardless of the setting of
>the new configuration attribute is a useful benefit.  However I'm not convinced
>that the decoder will ever need to parse an encoding that was not generated by
>it.

Yeah - I was thinking that having the encode/decode make sure they're doing the same thing was a good idea.  But I think as written it will do the right thing, albeit slightly less efficiently. 


>> Otherwise I'm fine with this fix.
>> 
>
>Great. Thanks.
>
>
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> At 11:41 AM 9/23/2011, Vincent Ryan wrote:
>>> Thanks for your feedback Michael. I agree that your provider-based solution is
>>> preferable. Here's a revised webrev:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vinnie/7054637/webrev.01/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 09/22/11 11:18 PM, Michael StJohns wrote:
>>>> Hi Vincent -
>>>>
>>>> Sorry - it took me a few days to look at this.  I can't support it.
>>>>
>>>> I think this the wrong way to do things - specifically the dependence on the
>>>> presence of a PKCS11 attribute in the Vendor space. 
>>>>
>>>> You've got a value in PKCS11Constants 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +    /* Only the raw encoding for an EC point is
>>>> supported */
>>>> +    public static final long CKA_ENABLE_RAW_EC_POINT =
>>>> (CKA_VENDOR_DEFINED | 1);
>>>> +
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that this has a pretty good chance of colliding with an actual
>>>> vendor defined value.  For example,  Utimaco has CKA_ATTRIBUTE_LIST  0x80000001
>>>> (same as CKA_VENDOR_DEFINED | 1).
>>>>
>>>> Instead, use the attribute list of the provider configuration.  You'll have to
>>>> mod sun.security.pkcs11.Config.java - but you won't have the changes in either
>>>> PKCS11Constants or Functions that are currently there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The problem should be provider wide and not need a per-token config item.
>>>>
>>>> So the config file gets instead:
>>>>
>>>> useEcX963Encoding=true around line 13 of the .cfg file.
>>>>
>>>> Config.java sets the boolean useEcX963Encoding.
>>>>
>>>> P11ECKeyFactory.java checks "token.config.useEcX963Encoding".
>>>>
>>>> Avoid the use of the term "raw" please - that got us into a number of problems
>>>> when revising PKCS11.  It actually tends to mean just the concatenation of the X
>>>> and Y points without a format identifier which is not what you mean here
>>>> according to PKCS11.  X9.63 encoding is 1 octet of format identifier - generally
>>>> 04 for uncompressed - and 2N bytes of X and Y.   ECPoint (as defined in PKCS11)
>>>> is the X9.63 encoding wrapped in an ASN1 OctetString.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks! Mike
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 02:17 PM 9/14/2011, Vincent Ryan wrote:
>>>>> Please review the following fix to the SunPKCS11 JCE provider:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vinnie/7054637/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem is that some older PKCS11 tokens support only the raw encoding for
>>>>> EC point in Elliptic Curve public keys. This fix introduces a configuration
>>>>> attribute that controls whether the raw-encoding or DER-encoding shall be used.
>>>>>
>>>>> It aids interoperability between older and newer PKCS11 tokens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>> 
>> 





More information about the security-dev mailing list