RFR: 8189441: Define algorithm names for keys derived from KeyAgreement [v11]

[Sean Mullan]

On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:58:22 GMT, Weijun Wang <weijun at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Allow `Generic` as an algorithm in the `KeyAgreement::generateSecret(alg)` method.
>
> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   cleaner test and harden p11-nss-sensitive.txt

src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KeyAgreement.java line 668:

> 666:      *      Java Security Standard Algorithm Names Specification</a>
> 667:      *      for information about standard secret key algorithm names.
> 668:      *      Use "Generic" if the output will be used as the input keying

s/Use/Specify/

src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/KeyAgreement.java line 674:

> 672:      *      may be adjusted to be compatible with the specified algorithm,
> 673:      *      regardless of whether the key is extractable. If {@code algorithm}
> 674:      *      is specified as "Generic", the full shared secret will be returned.

I think this last sentence is too strict, as some existing provider implementations may not support "Generic". I would suggest rewording as "If {@code algorithm} is specified as "Generic" and is supported by the implementation, the full shared secret is returned."

src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/ec/ECDHKeyAgreement.java line 260:

> 258:         if (!KeyUtil.isSupportedKeyAgreementOutputAlgorithm(algorithm)) {
> 259:             throw new NoSuchAlgorithmException
> 260:                 ("Only supported for algorithm TlsPremasterSecret");

Should the exception message and algorithm param in line 262 be less specific and use the algorithm parameter? i.e.:

`("Not supported for algorithm " + algorithm);`

and:

`SecretKeySpec(engineGenerateSecret(), algorithm)`
 
 Same comment for a few other files.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22650#discussion_r1905862697
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22650#discussion_r1905869075
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22650#discussion_r1905837938