Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

8344034: Remove security manager dependency in Serialization #22041

Closed

Conversation

RogerRiggs
Copy link
Contributor

@RogerRiggs RogerRiggs commented Nov 12, 2024

After JDK-8338411, Serialization implementation dependencies on SecurityManager, doPrivildged, and AccessController are removed.
Some refactoring to cleanup the remaining code is expected.


Progress

  • Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
  • Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
  • Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

  • JDK-8344034: Remove security manager dependency in Serialization (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22041/head:pull/22041
$ git checkout pull/22041

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/22041
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/22041/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 22041

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 22041

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22041.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

AlanBateman and others added 30 commits September 30, 2024 18:02
Co-authored-by: Sean Mullan <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alan Bateman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Weijun Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Aleksei Efimov <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Brian Burkhalter <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Fuchs <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Harshitha Onkar <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Joe Wang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jorn Vernee <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Justin Lu <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kevin Walls <[email protected]>>
Co-authored-by: Lance Andersen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Naoto Sato <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Roger Riggs <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Brent Christian <[email protected]>
setInitialContextFactoryBuilder and setObjectFactoryBuilder methods in
javax.naming.spi.NamingManager.
permission cannot be used anymore to control access.
…sion

checks of the Class.getNestHost and getNestMembers methods, which no
longer apply.
@openjdk openjdk bot added the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Nov 12, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Nov 12, 2024
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should all usages of SecurityManager be removed from this class?

@AlanBateman
Copy link
Contributor

ObjectInputFilter.setSerialFilter and setSerialFilterFactory, have they been missed?

java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(
new sun.security.action.GetBooleanAction(
"sun.io.serialization.extendedDebugInfo")).booleanValue();
private static final boolean extendedDebugInfo = Boolean.getBoolean("sun.io.serialization.extendedDebugInfo");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: bit of a long line, consider breaking into 2 lines.

Copy link
Member

@seanjmullan seanjmullan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good other than 2 small comments.

src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/ObjectInputStream.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 14, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 14, 2024
Copy link
Member

@seanjmullan seanjmullan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updates look good.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Nov 14, 2024
@RogerRiggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updates passed CI tier1, tier2, tier3

@RogerRiggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

/integrate

@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 18, 2024

Going to push as commit 9b0ab92.
Since your change was applied there have been 67 commits pushed to the master branch:

  • d52d136: 8344221: Remove calls to SecurityManager and and doPrivileged in java.net.IDN, java.net.URL, java.net.URLConnection, sun.net.util.URLUtil, and java.net.URLStreamHandlerProvider after JEP 486 integration
  • dfddbca: 8341916: Remove ProtectionDomain related hotspot code and tests
  • 5eb0733: 8344383: Include ZipArchive and JarArchive directly
  • b8b70c8: 8344379: [s390x] build failure due to missing change from JDK-8339466
  • 5fc4322: 8288298: Resolve multiline message parsing ambiguities in UL
  • ea8f289: 8344271: Comparison build fails due to difference in doc summary
  • b9c6ce9: 8344122: IGV: Extend c2 IdealGraphPrinter to send subgraphs to IGV
  • 00ff6a3: 8344105: Remove SecurityManager and related calls from jdk.attach and jdk.hotspot.agent
  • 475feb0: 8344056: Use markdown format for man pages
  • 6c2ae44: 8344204: IGV: Button to enable/disable cutting of long edges
  • ... and 57 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/752e1629555f0ec8630373ec87b049afdd709ea6...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

@openjdk openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Nov 18, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot closed this Nov 18, 2024
@openjdk openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Nov 18, 2024
@openjdk
Copy link

openjdk bot commented Nov 18, 2024

@RogerRiggs Pushed as commit 9b0ab92.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core-libs [email protected] integrated Pull request has been integrated
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.