答复: Code review request, 7106773: 512 bits RSA key cannot work withSHA384 and SHA512

[Xuelei Fan]

On 1/10/2012 11:09 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> It's late night and I'll read it tomorrow. But can you choose another
> word instead of Lengthable? Length is not a verb.
> 
;-) The name took me a lot of time, searching by google, dictionary, and
any possible English translation. I have to agree that I failed to find
a suitable name. I tried hardly to persuade myself that "lengthable" is
also used by someother application code, so it might not too bad to use
it here.

With the word "lengthable", I want to express that the length is
measurable. Any suggestion for the better one?

Thanks,
Xuelei

> Max
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 发件人: Xuelei Fan
> 发送时间: 2012/1/10 22:51
> 收件人: Weijun Wang
> 抄送: OpenJDK
> 主题: Re: Code review request, 7106773: 512 bits RSA key cannot work
> withSHA384 and SHA512
> 
> It has been around 50 days passed since the last day we talked about the
> issue. Hope you can recall it from the deep memory. ;-)
> 
> webrev: http://javaweb.us.oracle.com/~xufan/bugbios/7106773/webrev.04/
> 
> In this update, as we agreed, a new Oracle private interface was
> introduced: sun.security.util.Lengthable, and Lengthable.length() is
> defined to get the length an object. sun.security.pkcs11.P11Key and
> sun.security.mscapi.Key will implements the interface. As will easy and
> speedup (comparing with reflection approach) the getting of key length
> of those unextractable keys in hardware device.
> 
> In the webrev, I should also include another two signed jars,
> sunpkcs11.jar and sunmscapi.jar. I will include them when I get the
> official signed jars.
> 
> Thanks,
> Xuelei
> 
> On 11/22/2011 8:41 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> I really like this one.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Max
>>
>> On 11/21/2011 08:05 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>>>> >  How about this approach? This looks very safe.
>>>> >
>>> I also prefer this approach, although it need more updates in PKCS11 and
>>> MSCPI source code. If you vote for this approach, I will try to
>>> implement it.
>>>
>