RFR: JDK-8295087: Manual Test to Automated Test Conversion [v5]

Bill Huang bhuang at openjdk.org
Tue Dec 20 19:07:58 UTC 2022

On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 11:48:54 GMT, Sibabrata Sahoo <ssahoo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Bill Huang has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains five additional commits since the last revision:
>>  - Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8295087
>>  - Added an extra line to the end of the policy file.
>>  - AssertThrows an exception in InconsistentEntries test.
>>  - Refactored to use testng framework for test enviroment setup.
>>  - Converted security manual tests to automated tests.
> test/jdk/javax/crypto/CryptoPermissions/InconsistentEntries.java line 52:
>> 50:     private static final String JDK_HOME = System.getProperty("test.jdk");
>> 51:     private static final String TEST_SRC = System.getProperty("test.src");
>> 52:     private static final Path POLICY_DIR = Paths.get(JDK_HOME, "conf", "security",
> This doesn't looks like a safe Test to be automated. Can it create conflict with any other existing Test requiring "testlimited" with  default_local.policy? This need to be verified. Also changing anything inside an installed JDK probably not a good choice. It's just a thought from my side and it could be different for others.

Good points. I searched the entire repo and this is the only instance that uses the "testlimited" with default_local.policy. Looking over the logic, the test sets the crypto.policy property to "testlimited". So I am wondering if the "testlimited" is created for test purposes. If so, are we allowed to rename "testlimited" to be more specific, eg. "testcryptoperms"? 
`Security.setProperty("crypto.policy", "testlimited");`


PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10637

More information about the security-dev mailing list