RFR: 8331008: Implement JEP 478: Key Derivation Function API (Preview) [v10]

[Weijun Wang]

On Wed, 7 Aug 2024 00:25:09 GMT, Valerie Peng <valeriep at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Kevin Driver 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 16 additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - update test to include Spi updates
>>  - Update with latest from master
>>    
>>    Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into kdf-jep-wip
>>    # Please enter a commit message to explain why this merge is necessary,
>>    # especially if it merges an updated upstream into a topic branch.
>>    #
>>    # Lines starting with '#' will be ignored, and an empty message aborts
>>    # the commit.
>>  - add engineGetKDFParameters to the KDFSpi
>>  - code review comment fix for javadoc specification
>>  - change course on null return values from derive methods
>>  - code review comments
>>  - threading refactor + code review comments
>>  - review comments
>>  - review comments
>>  - update code snippet type in KDF
>>  - ... and 6 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/4fcf73db...dd2ee48f
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KDFSpi.java line 65:
> 
>> 63:      * @param kdfParameters
>> 64:      *     the initialization parameters for the {@code KDF} algorithm (may be
>> 65:      *     {@code null})
> 
> Should we further specify what {@code null} means or when it is (not-)allowed? For KDF algorithms which does not use initialization parameters, {@code null} should be specified, otherwise IAPE is thrown? However, for KDF algorithms which use initialization parameters, can {@code null} be specified? Is it ok for the provider to choose their own default values when {@code null} is specified through {@code KDF.getInstance()} calls? But then callers have to call {@code KDF.getKDFParameters()} to check/find out?

I would answer yes, yes, yes, yes, and YES. :-)

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20301#discussion_r1707404257