Oh, I didn't know it was specified in 
KeyStore.PasswordProtection.getProtectionAlgorithm(). I'll need to rework on 
webrev.04.

As for pkcs12 or PKCS12, do we really need to treat old and new properties 
differently? I would document them in java.security with pkcs12 but support 
reading both.

--Max

> On Sep 27, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Sean Mullan <sean.mul...@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> On 9/27/18 1:58 AM, Weijun Wang wrote:
>> All others accepted.
>>> 1122 keystore.pkcs12.certProtectionAlgorithm = PBEWithSHA1AndRC2_40
>>> 
>>> Shouldn't this be named certPbeAlgorithm so that it matches 
>>> certPbeIterationCount? Same comment about keyProtectionAlgorithm.
>> Unfortunately we already had "keystore.pkcs12.keyProtectionAlgorithm" and it 
>> also accepts "PKCS12". 
> 
> Ah, I see - I forgot about that property.
> 
> See 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~weijun/8076190/webrev.03/src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/pkcs12/PKCS12KeyStore.java-.html:
>>  147     private static final String[] KEY_PROTECTION_ALGORITHM = {
>>  148         "keystore.pkcs12.keyProtectionAlgorithm",
>>  149         "keystore.PKCS12.keyProtectionAlgorithm"
>>  150     };
>> But you are right the names are not consistent and supporting both "pkcs12" 
>> and "PKCS12" is awkward (and cannot make use of the new 
>> SecurityProperties::privilegedGetOverridable method). Now I decide to name 
>> the new properties as (key|cert)PbeAlgorithm names with only "pkcs12", and 
>> only support the old names as a fallback.
> 
> Hmm, but this means we have to support 2 properties meaning the same thing, 
> and the KeyStore.PasswordProtection.getProtectionAlgorithm() is already 
> specified to use the keystore.<type>.keyProtectionAlgorithm property. Based 
> on that, I take back my comment, and I think it would be better to retain the 
> existing property instead of defining another one with the same meaning. I 
> don't like having to try to get the properties with "pkcs12" and "PKCS12", 
> but it seems we could live with that since we have been doing it and we only 
> need to do this for the existing properties - we could assume "pkcs12" for 
> all of the new ones.
> 
> --Sean

Reply via email to