<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <p>I like Bernd's first suggestion: instead of "weak key" use "weak
      key size" (or something similar). This seems like a relatively
      simple solution that will clarify what is actually being tested.<br>
    </p>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/25/2017 11:09 AM, Bernd Eckenfels
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:DB6P193MB0023FB92286667B2758C166EFF310@DB6P193MB0023.EURP193.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=windows-1252">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Exchange Server">
      <!-- converted from text -->
      <style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; padding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style>
      <div>
        <div id="x_compose-container" itemscope=""
          itemtype="https://schema.org/EmailMessage">
          <span itemprop="creator" itemscope=""
            itemtype="https://schema.org/Organization"><span
              itemprop="name"></span></span>
          <div>
            <div>Sure, did not want to cause work. it is just a minor
              thing, I guess most people would read "weak" as "short"
              (even when weak key has another meaning in cryptography).
              It is good to have those warnings. <br>
              <br>
              <div class="x_acompli_signature">Gruss<br>
                Bernd<br>
                -- <br>
                <a moz-do-not-send="true" dir="ltr"
                  href="http://bernd.eckenfels.net">http://bernd.eckenfels.net</a></div>
              <br>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
        <hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
        <div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt"
            face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b>
            security-dev <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:security-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net"><security-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net></a>
            on behalf of Weijun Wang <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:weijun.wang@oracle.com"><weijun.wang@oracle.com></a><br>
            <b>Sent:</b> Saturday, March 25, 2017 1:46:03 AM<br>
            <b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:security-dev@openjdk.java.net">security-dev@openjdk.java.net</a><br>
            <b>Subject:</b> Re: RFR: 3 security-libs release notes on
            keytool/krb5/etc</font>
          <div> </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt;">
          <div class="PlainText">After I said I would use short key I
            was also wondering how I should
            <br>
            describe this in the keytool and jarsigner output. Now I
            think "weak" is <br>
            more general and it covers the short length. I'll stick with
            it.<br>
            <br>
            Bernd, hopefully you find this OK. When one see "512-bit key
            (weak)", it <br>
            means some quality test is already done.<br>
            <br>
            Thanks<br>
            Max<br>
            <br>
            On 03/25/2017 04:06 AM, Anthony Scarpino wrote:<br>
            > I'd agree with Sean, "weak" implies anything risk, the
            weakness isn't<br>
            > necessarily key length related.<br>
            ><br>
            > Tony<br>
            ><br>
            > On 03/24/2017 11:56 AM, Sean Mullan wrote:<br>
            >> On 3/24/17 7:01 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:<br>
            >>> I'll use "short key".<br>
            >><br>
            >> I prefer the term "weak" which implies it is a
            risk. We already use that<br>
            >> term in jarsigner so I think we should keep it
            consistent. You also<br>
            >> print the size of the key so that describes what is
            wrong with it.<br>
            >><br>
            >> --Sean<br>
            >><br>
            >>><br>
            >>> Thanks<br>
            >>> Max<br>
            >>><br>
            >>> On 03/24/2017 06:26 PM, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:<br>
            >>>> I wonder if "weak key" should be replaced
            by "weak key length" or<br>
            >>>> "short<br>
            >>>> key". It might otherwise imply key quality
            tests which are not carried<br>
            >>>> out.<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> Gruss<br>
            >>>> Bernd<br>
            >>>> --<br>
            >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://bernd.eckenfels.net">http://bernd.eckenfels.net</a><br>
            >>>> <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bernd.eckenfels.net&d=DwMFAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=L95YSg0eIcTu_shXWyN3XgC5kRlt5xJJuqogC6Ulqlk&m=nQPaZ9oNisvgXYmsVbzFkcB0qjPKYWTsWh0IIQtt1nw&s=yLFl1pk3TBMwqMqZMDE2e4d8rt9AVyNfUaC84QV3Lr0&e=">https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__bernd.eckenfels.net&d=DwMFAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PQcxBKCX5YTpkKY057SbK10&r=L95YSg0eIcTu_shXWyN3XgC5kRlt5xJJuqogC6Ulqlk&m=nQPaZ9oNisvgXYmsVbzFkcB0qjPKYWTsWh0IIQtt1nw&s=yLFl1pk3TBMwqMqZMDE2e4d8rt9AVyNfUaC84QV3Lr0&e=</a>><br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>>
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> *From:* security-dev
            <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:security-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net"><security-dev-bounces@openjdk.java.net></a> on behalf<br>
            >>>> of Weijun Wang
            <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:weijun.wang@oracle.com"><weijun.wang@oracle.com></a><br>
            >>>> *Sent:* Friday, March 24, 2017 2:12:01 AM<br>
            >>>> *To:* Security Dev OpenJDK<br>
            >>>> *Subject:* RFR: 3 security-libs release
            notes on keytool/krb5/etc<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> Hi All<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> Please take a review on 3 release notes.
            The content itself is<br>
            >>>> pasted as<br>
            >>>> quotation below.<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8176087">https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8176087</a><br>
            >>>> keytool now prints warnings when reading or
            generating cert/cert req<br>
            >>>> using weak algorithms<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>>> In all keytool functions, if the
            certificate/certificate request/CRL<br>
            >>>>> that is working on (whether it be the
            input, the output, or an<br>
            >>>>> existing object) is using a weak
            algorithm or key, a warning will be<br>
            >>>>> printed out.<br>
            >>>>><br>
            >>>>> Precisely, an algorithm or a key is
            weak if it matches the value of<br>
            >>>>> the jdk.certpath.disabledAlgorithms
            security property defined in<br>
            >>>>> conf/security/java.security.<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174143">https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8174143</a><br>
            >>>> Deprecate security APIs that have been
            superseded<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>>> The classes and interfaces in the
            `java.security.acl` and<br>
            >>>>> `javax.security.cert` packages have
            been superseded by replacements<br>
            >>>>> for a long time and are deprecated in
            JDK 9. Two methods<br>
            >>>>>
            `javax.net.ssl.HandshakeCompletedEvent.getPeerCertificateChain()`
            and<br>
            >>>>>
            `javax.net.ssl.SSLSession.getPeerCertificateChain()` are
            also<br>
            >>>>> deprecated since they return the<br>
            >>>>> `javax.security.cert.X509Certificate`
            type.<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168635">https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8168635</a><br>
            >>>> rcache interop with krb5-1.15<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>>> The hash algorithm used in the Kerberos
            5 replay cache file (rcache)<br>
            >>>>> is updated from MD5 to SHA256 with this
            change. This is also the<br>
            >>>>> algorithm used by MIT krb5-1.15. This
            change is interoperable with<br>
            >>>>> earlier releases of MIT krb5, which
            means Kerberos 5 acceptors from<br>
            >>>>> JDK 9 and MIT krb5-1.14 can share the
            same rcache file.<br>
            >>>>><br>
            >>>>> A new system property named
            jdk.krb5.rcache.useMD5 is introduced. If<br>
            >>>>> the system property is set to "true",
            JDK 9 will still use the MD5<br>
            >>>>> hash algorithm in rcache. This is
            useful when both of the following<br>
            >>>>> conditions are true: 1) the system has
            a very coarse clock and has to<br>
            >>>>> depend on hash values in replay attack
            detection, and 2)<br>
            >>>>> interoperability with earlier versions
            of JDK or MIT krb5 for rcache<br>
            >>>>> files is required. The default value of
            this system property is<br>
            >>>>> "false".<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>> Thanks<br>
            >>>> Max<br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>><br>
            >>>><br>
            ><br>
          </div>
        </span></font>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>