That looks fine to me.
Tony
On 08/01/2018 08:39 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
Thanks again for review Tony. I think you raise a good point and should
give some performance gain.
for line 676: maybe this :
byte[] copy = Arrays.copyOf(output, len);
if (decrypting) {
Arrays.fill(output, (byte) 0x00);
}
return copy;
perhaps the same again for around line 852 :
byte[] copy = Arrays.copyOf(output, len);
if (decrypting) {
Arrays.fill(output, (byte) 0x00);
}
return copy;
==
Any other reviews/comments from folks before I submit final build/test &
webrev ?
Regards,
Sean.
On 01/08/18 15:55, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
My only comment is if it makes sense to have the change at 676 to also
only null out on decrypt?
Otherwise I'm fine with the changes
Tony
On 07/31/2018 02:04 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
Thanks for review Tony. Comments inline..
On 27/07/18 21:02, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
If we are going to add more, here are two more ton consider:
- It looks like there is another Arrays.copyOf() on doFinal() line 851
Good point.
- doFinal()
at line 897 there might be something that should be done with
'buffer'. In particular as a result of line 963's arraycopy().
Yes - I've identified two areas where we can be proactive about
nulling out 'buffer' contents. That's around the same time where we
reset 'buffered' to 0. See lines 777 and 967
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8207775.v3/webrev/
regards,
Sean.
Tony
On 07/27/2018 08:29 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
Thanks Tony. If it's alright with you, I'd like to make one more
edit for this change.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8207775.v2/webrev/
There's a condition where we can null out an array early if we're
returning a copy. See lines 671-683
Regards,
Sean.
On 26/07/18 17:42, Anthony Scarpino wrote:
On 07/26/2018 07:36 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8207775
Simple enough fix to null out some internal buffers once they're
no longer required.
webrev : http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coffeys/webrev.8207775/webrev/
regards,
Sean.
that looks fine..
Tony
