Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4854200B46 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 14:45:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D31AE160A5F; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 297C8160A5D for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 14:45:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 47557 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jul 2016 12:45:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commits-help@pirk.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@pirk.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list commits@pirk.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 47548 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jul 2016 12:45:23 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:23 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id F2B42C040A for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:22 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.446 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.446 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vWPVCkLFeP3R for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with SMTP id 8C85D5F1F3 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 46910 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jul 2016 12:45:20 -0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas) (140.211.11.28) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:20 +0000 Received: from arcas.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arcas (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9320A2C0031 for ; Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:20 +0000 (UTC) From: "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" To: commits@pirk.incubator.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (PIRK-2) Enhance Pallier acquisition of PRNG provider MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 12:45:25 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-2?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15380732#comment-15380732 ] ASF GitHub Bot commented on PIRK-2: ----------------------------------- Github user eawiliams commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/incubator-pirk/pull/2 For the user that would like to remove the ambiguity of the provider, adding a configuration option to specify the provider seems reasonable. Additionally, as the SecureRandom constructor explicitly provides for this option: SecureRandom(SecureRandomSpi secureRandomSpi, Provider provider) it makes sense to extend it outwards to Pirk. > Enhance Pallier acquisition of PRNG provider > -------------------------------------------- > > Key: PIRK-2 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIRK-2 > Project: PIRK > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Tim Ellison > Assignee: Tim Ellison > > {{org.apache.pirk.encryption.Pallier}} has a hard coded requirement for the {{NativePRNG}} algorithm to be supplied by the {{SUN}} provider. This causes the {{test.general.PaillierTest}} to fail on IBM's Java implementation. > The implementation should allow the provider to be configured by the java.security properties of the runtime to allow for provider optimizations, etc. > Furthermore, the instantiation of a provider is relatively (CPU) expensive, so reusing the PRNG is preferable to acquiring it each time a value is required. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)