On Thu, 20 May 2021 16:10:11 GMT, Roger Riggs <rri...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> JEP 415: Context-specific Deserialization Filters extends the >> deserialization filtering mechanisms with more flexible and customizable >> protections against malicious deserialization. See JEP 415: >> https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/415. >> The `java.io.ObjectInputFilter` and `java.io.ObjectInputStream` classes are >> extended with additional >> configuration mechanisms and filter utilities. >> >> javadoc for `ObjectInputFilter`, `ObjectInputFilter.Config`, and >> `ObjectInputStream`: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/filter-factory/java.base/java/io/ObjectInputFilter.html > > Roger Riggs has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Simplify factory interface to BinaryOperator<ObjectInputFilter> and cleanup > the example src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/ObjectInputFilter.java line 559: > 557: * Returns the static JVM-wide deserialization filter or {@code > null} if not configured. > 558: * > 559: * @return the static JVM-wide deserialization filter or {@code > null} if not configured Is "static" significant here? Can it be dropped? I fine myself questioning if the "static JVM-wide" and "JVM-wide" are two different filters. If we do this then we have just two terms: 1) the "JVM-wide deserialization filter" and 2) the "JVM-wide deserialization filter factory". Additionally, can you please check all occurrence of these, to ensure that they are used consistently in all parts of the spec. I think I see serial/serialization (without the "de" ) used in a few places. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3996
