harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Updated: (HARMONY-35) Harmony ignores java.security.policy property
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:01:41 GMT
sorry for being flippant -- I took your "Ok? sure" as agreement.

Since it is a reported bug in the existing code, with a patch that looks
good, I figured the (literally) 60 seconds it took me to release it into
HEAD may help out anyone who downloads the code in the time it takes to
merge security2.  Hopefully its life-span is only a couple of hours.

Regards,
Tim

Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
> pointless, but ok.
> 
> geir
> 
> 
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> I'll race ya' :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>
>>> Tim Ellison wrote:
>>>> Good -- so what I'll do is to release George's patch to the com.ibm
>>>> version to get him working, on the understanding that the whole type
>>>> will become obsolete soon when the security2 code is integrated.  Ok?
>>> sure, but how long will it take us to integrate?  We should just do that
>>> ASAP.
>>>
>>> geir
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>> Stepan Mishura wrote:
>>>>> Hi George,
>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason for this buggy behaviour is the incomplete
>>>>>> implementation of
>>>>>> com.ibm.oti.util.DefaultPolicy in the luni component. The
>>>>>> readPolicy()
>>>>>> method needs work to actually fulfill its contract as laid out in
the
>>>>>> Javadoc comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>> com.ibm.oti.util.DefaultPolicy extends java.security.Policy class
>>>>> that is
>>>>> from the security component.
>>>>> BTW, we do have another implementation of java.security.Policy that is
>>>>> org.apache.harmony.security.fortress.DefaultPolicy and
>>>>> I've verified that in this particular case implementation from
>>>>> 'security2'
>>>>> works correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Stepan Mishura
>>>>> Intel Middleware Products Division
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/20/06, George Harley (JIRA) <jira@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-35?page=all ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> George Harley updated HARMONY-35:
>>>>>> ---------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    Attachment: HARMONY-35-patch.txt
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The attached patch seems to fix it for me on Win XP. Not tested on
>>>>>> Linux.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> George
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Harmony ignores java.security.policy property
>>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>          Key: HARMONY-35
>>>>>>>          URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-35
>>>>>>>      Project: Harmony
>>>>>>>         Type: Bug
>>>>>>>   Components: Classlib
>>>>>>>  Environment: Win32 and Linux
>>>>>>>     Reporter: George Harley
>>>>>>>  Attachments: HARMONY-35-patch.txt
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here is the complete contents of a Java security policy file
>>>>>>> called "
>>>>>> mysecurity.policy" that can be used to specify additional
>>>>>> permissions to a
>>>>>> JRE...
>>>>>>> ---------snip----------
>>>>>>> grant {
>>>>>>>     // so we can remove the security manager
>>>>>>>     permission java.lang.RuntimePermission "setSecurityManager";
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>> ---------snip----------
>>>>>>> If its location is passed in the Java launch arguments with the
>>>>>> java.security.policy property as below then the permissions are
>>>>>> added to
>>>>>> the default set of permissions that the JRE runs with ...
>>>>>>> -Djava.security.policy=c:\path\to\mysecurity.policy
>>>>>>> If the following unit test is run against a sandbox build of
the
>>>>>> classlibs under SVN trunk on the IBM Apache Harmony VME with the
>>>>>> java.security.policy set (as above) so that the "setSecurityManager"
>>>>>> runtime permission is added, then a pass should result. It doesn't.
>>>>>>> -----------snip--------------
>>>>>>> package foo;
>>>>>>> import java.security.AccessControlException;
>>>>>>> import junit.framework.TestCase;
>>>>>>> public class SecurityPolicyTest extends TestCase {
>>>>>>>     public void testPermissions() {
>>>>>>>         try {
>>>>>>>             System.out
>>>>>>>                     .println("Trying to set the security manager
the
>>>>>> first time...");
>>>>>>>             System.setSecurityManager(new SecurityManager());
>>>>>>>             System.out.println("Trying to set the security
>>>>>>> manager to
>>>>>> null...");
>>>>>>>             System.setSecurityManager(null);
>>>>>>>             assertEquals(null, System.getSecurityManager());
>>>>>>>         } catch (AccessControlException e) {
>>>>>>>             fail("Caught AccessControlException : " +
>>>>>>> e.getMessage());
>>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> -----------snip--------------
>>>>>>> The failure occurs because an AccessControlException is thrown
on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>> second call to System.setSecurityManager() when the test tries to
>>>>>> pass a
>>>>>> null argument.
>>>>>>> The problem is that after the first call to
>>>>>>> System.setSecurityManager()
>>>>>> has installed a security manager, there is no runtime permission
to
>>>>>> enable
>>>>>> the security manager to be set again. This is despite the fact that
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> running the test we set the java.security.policy property to point
>>>>>> to a
>>>>>> file that grants this very permission !
>>>>>>> The reason for this buggy behaviour is the incomplete
>>>>>>> implementation of
>>>>>> com.ibm.oti.util.DefaultPolicy in the luni component. The
>>>>>> readPolicy()
>>>>>> method needs work to actually fulfill its contract as laid out in
the
>>>>>> Javadoc comments.
>>>>>>> George
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the
>>>>>> administrators:
>>>>>>   http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> For more information on JIRA, see:
>>>>>>   http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

Mime
View raw message