RFR (12): 8191053: Provide a mechanism to make system's security manager immutable

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Tue Oct 2 18:47:58 UTC 2018


On 02/10/2018 16:34, Sean Mullan wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Thanks for all the comments so far, and the interesting discussions 
> about the future of the SecurityManager. We will definitely return to 
> those discussions in the near future, but for now I have a second 
> webrev ready for review for this enhancement:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mullan/webrevs/8191053/webrev.01/
I see the mails between you and Mandy about not using the double equals 
and using "allow" and "disallow". That makes sense as it is consistent 
with "default" and the chances of someone of having a SM class named 
"allow" or "disallow" isn't wroth worrying about.

In System.java L85 it has "utilize" and might be clearer to stick with 
"set". L88 has "installed at startup" where it might be more consistent 
to use "set" there too.

Otherwise looks good to me.

-Alan



More information about the security-dev mailing list