db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mathias Herberts <Mathias.Herbe...@iroise.net>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-1373) Encrypted databases cannot be booted using the jar subprotocol (and possibly also using http/https/classpath)
Date Sun, 16 Jul 2006 21:07:27 GMT
Sunitha Kambhampati (JIRA) wrote:
>      [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1373?page=all ]
> Sunitha Kambhampati updated DERBY-1373:
> ---------------------------------------
>     Attachment: derby1373.diff.txt
>                 derby1373.stat.txt
> Mathias wrote:
> "I had a look to the suggestion Suresh made.This is a change I do not have time to implement
as it would mean revalidate all other cases which are currently working. "
> So I followed up on Suresh's suggestion and am attaching a patch 'derby1373.diff.txt'
and 'derby1373.stat.txt' for review.
> This patch makes the following changes:
> 1) Instead of using RandomAccessFile, the verifyKey.dat is read as a InputStream. 
> 2)   Add a new test (encryptionKey_jar.sql) for booting encrypted database using encryptionKey
via classpath, and jar subprotocol. 
> Please note, as already mentioned in an earlier comment - There are existing test (encryptionKey.sql)
that test cases for encryptionKey.
> The test will fail without the code change, and will pass with  the code changes.
> svn stat
> M      java\engine\org\apache\derby\impl\services\jce\JCECipherFactory.java
> M      java\testing\org\apache\derbyTesting\functionTests\tests\store\copyfiles.ant
> A      java\testing\org\apache\derbyTesting\functionTests\tests\store\encryptionKey_jar.sql
> A      java\testing\org\apache\derbyTesting\functionTests\tests\store\encryptionKey_jar_app.properties
> A      java\testing\org\apache\derbyTesting\functionTests\master\encryptionKey_jar.out
> M      java\testing\org\apache\derbyTesting\functionTests\suites\encryptionAll.runall
> I ran derbyall on ibm142 on linux ok. I made one small change to a comment in the test
after that. I have run the test again and it passed ok.
> Can someone please review this patch.  
> Thanks to Mathias for finding the problem, reporting it, providing a fix and for the
good discussion that followed on this issue.  If you have the time, it would be nice if you
can verify if this works for you.


I'm really sorry for not being more active on this issue lately, I've 
been kept busy by other (more urgent) stuff.

I'll try to test the provided patch on our setup, it should be rather 
simple to do.

I'll keep you updated on the results.

Thank you very much for your work, and once again sorry for not helping 
out much.



View raw message