Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of mloenko@gmail.com designates
 64.233.162.199 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=azSpCGcp8zyUppkffXESKrhTM9IKo4fb6Nh1qBf/hbUg4h9agFYJcTtSPwaQPmNOKX9w8V+mmivhc+dgTkjnA2CkkHT/gk4ajVZsDnqoYktAGEc6vziiFm9PMD0TVxfnOduPwTwT82EULZX5PrTiat5azuIOrpnUzX2hyT2sHME=
Message-ID: <906dd82e0609050100s1c1f03a2lfeddbad2f52c911b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 15:00:47 +0700
From: "Mikhail Loenko" <mloenko@gmail.com>
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib][security] Exception compatibility
In-Reply-To: <b266b8670609040610r10bba2ebh3db1ef926ecff179@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <b266b8670609040610r10bba2ebh3db1ef926ecff179@mail.gmail.com>

IMHO we should look from the perspective of migrating the apps.

So let's try to make behavior of "Harmony + BC provider" close
to "Sun + Sun's provider"

If without the checks the combination Harmony+BC works similar to
Sun+Sun's provider, then let's remove the checks. Otherwise let's
keep it to make the behavior at least logical.

Thanks,
Mikhail


2006/9/4, Boris Kuznetsov <boris.v.kuznetsov@gmail.com>:
> Usually Harmony behavior is compared with RI behavior. But in security
> area RI behavior depends on provider. With different providers RI
> behave differently.
>
> For example, RI passes incorrect method arguments to provider. In such
> cases provider may throw exception (e.g. DigestException or
> IllegalArgumentException) or some RuntimeException (e.g.
> ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException) may be thrown during the execution.
> Here is example.
>
> There are number of methods with arguments like (byte[] buf, int
> offset, int len). RI doesn't check if offset and len are negative but
> Harmony does, so we have difference in behavior (see Harmony-1120,
> 1148): on combination RI + provider application gets provider specific
> exception, but on Harmony + provider - IllegalArgumentException (as in
> other invalid parameters cases).
>
> So we have two options:
> 1. Fix Harmony (remove negative parameters checks)
> 2. Don't fix. Throw IllegalArgumentException for invalid parameters.
> Document as non-bug difference from RI.
>
> Note, specification doesn't describe implementation behavior for
> invalid arguments, but RI also throws IllegalArgumentException if
> ofsset+len > buf.length. So throwing of IllegalArgumentException in
> Harmony can't break any application.
>
> I suggest option 2.
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Boris
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org