Sure, looks fine to me as well.
Thanks,
Valerie
On 8/4/2020 2:03 PM, Martin Balao wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to propose a fix for 8251117 [1], on behalf of Zdenek Zambersky
(Red Hat employee - OCA signed).
Webrev.00:
* http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbalao/webrevs/8251117/8251117.webrev.00/
As not
On 07/08/2020 18:27, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
Well if there were a bug it's with NativePRNG as the operation is
suppose to be non-blocking. Even so, /dev/urandom is nonblocking.
The only reason this looks to have been detected by the tool is
because it's a blocking read op. This all seems lik
Well if there were a bug it's with NativePRNG as the operation is
suppose to be non-blocking. Even so, /dev/urandom is nonblocking. The
only reason this looks to have been detected by the tool is because it's
a blocking read op. This all seems like an extremely unlikely
situation. I don't s
Looks good.
--Sean
On 8/7/20 5:04 AM, abdul.kolarku...@oracle.com wrote:
Thanks Sean for the review.
Addressed your comments on new webrev -
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akolarkunnu/8248745/webrev.02/
-Muneer
On 06/08/20 8:00 pm, Sean Mullan wrote:
You should also add a test for MD2 and MD
I think the possibility that it may block should be enough to signal and so
offload to a task.
If it never blocks then it’s not a bug... that’s why I asked the question in
the first place .
Bye
Norman
> Am 07.08.2020 um 18:13 schrieb Alan Bateman :
>
> On 07/08/2020 16:00, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 07/08/2020 16:00, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Hm, it's an interesting bug. I filed the issue on the Java Bug System.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251304
It is a bug that a new random cookie is needed or it has from read from
/dev/urandom? I don't think the stack trace is enough to know
Thanks a lot… So seems like my assumption is correct then :)
Bye
Norman
> On 7. Aug 2020, at 17:00, Xuelei Fan wrote:
>
> Hm, it's an interesting bug. I filed the issue on the Java Bug System.
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251304
>
> Thanks,
> Xuelei
>
> On 8/7/2020 5:00 AM,
Hm, it's an interesting bug. I filed the issue on the Java Bug System.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251304
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 8/7/2020 5:00 AM, Norman Maurer wrote:
Hi there,
In netty we support using BlockHound[1] to detect if people do blocking
operations within the EventLoo
Please review this change to deprecate the following APIs:
java.security.cert.X509Certificate.getIssuerDN()
java.security.cert.X509Certificate.getSubjectDN()
java.security.cert.X509CRL.getIssuerDN()
java.security.cert.X509CertSelector.setIssuer(String)
java.security.cert.X509CertSelector.setSubje
Hi there,
In netty we support using BlockHound[1] to detect if people do blocking
operations within the EventLoop and so notify them that this should not be
done. While running our integration tests with TLS1.3 we noticed that unwrap(…)
may trigger an FileInputStream.read(…) which in theory cou
Thanks Sean for the review.
Addressed your comments on new webrev -
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~akolarkunnu/8248745/webrev.02/
-Muneer
On 06/08/20 8:00 pm, Sean Mullan wrote:
You should also add a test for MD2 and MD5 for the jarsigner
-digestalg option.
125 private static void testJ
11 matches
Mail list logo