RFR: 8169335: Add a crypto.policy fallback in case Security Property 'crypto.policy' does not exist

[Wang Weijun]

> On Nov 17, 2016, at 6:10 AM, Bradford Wetmore <bradford.wetmore at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Current iteration:
> 
>    http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~wetmore/8169335/webrev.01
> 
> Changes:
> 
> 1.  Using Debug "jca" instead of "policy"
> 
> 2.  Using debug.println (System.err), as the other jca calls are also using it.

Still have a question:

Why must both (debug != null) and Debug.isOn("jca") be checked? If Debug.getInstance("jca") is not null, shouldn't Debug.isOn("jca") always be true?

> 
> 3.  Added regression test.  Strips out any crypto.policy entry to create a new file, then uses it.

Looks fine, but I heard you can use some cool jdk8 classes like

   for (in = Files.lines(input); out = new PrintWriter(output)) {
      in.filter(x -> !x.contains("crypto.policy")).forEach(out::println);
   }

--Max


> 
> 4.  Updated webrev with bugid/reviewers.
> 
> Brad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/16/2016 6:21 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
>> In the recent jdk8u-dev edits of this file for 8157561, we introduced a
>> debug field based on this key :
>> 
>> Debug.getInstance("jca", "Cipher");
>> 
>> Can we continue to use 'jca' to be consistent for people upgrading ?
>> 
>> for the testcase, I guess you can edit
>> test/javax/crypto/CryptoPermission/TestUnlimited.java but you'll have to
>> launch with a customized java.security file which doesn't have
>> crypto.policy set. (Security.setProperty doesn't allow null values)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Sean.
>> 
>> On 16/11/16 00:40, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
>>> Never noticed that before!  We have NOT been consistent in whether we
>>> use:
>>> 
>>>    System.out.println()
>>> or
>>>    debug.println()
>>> 
>>> I knew SeanC wants to rework the JCA/JCE/Security debugging output in
>>> another project, so I will remove the prefix for now.  Thanks for
>>> catching it.
>>> 
>>> I will also add a simple regression Test before I push.  In hindsight,
>>> it's not as trivial a change as I initially thought.  If you want to
>>> review it, I can wait until you are back tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> Brad
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 11/15/2016 4:12 PM, Wang Weijun wrote:
>>>> You create a debug field with a prefix string and then check both
>>>> debug != null and Debug.isOn("policy") and then use
>>>> System.out.println to print the message. Something must be useless.
>>>> 
>>>> --Max
>>>> 
>>>>> On Nov 16, 2016, at 3:31 AM, Bradford Wetmore
>>>>> <bradford.wetmore at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Simple codereview:
>>>>> 
>>>>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~wetmore/8169335/webrev.00
>>>>> 
>>>>> The "crypto.policy" Security property is normally defined/configured
>>>>> in the java.security file at build time.  (e.g. "limited" or
>>>>> "unlimited") Rather than currently failing catastrophically if this
>>>>> value doesn't exist, there should be a sensible default if it is
>>>>> undeclared for whatever reason.  We will use a sane fallback value
>>>>> of "limited".
>>>>> 
>>>>> If the distribution has also removed the "limited" policy directory
>>>>> then the VM will still fail to initialize, but we have at least made
>>>>> an effort to recover.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Brad
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>