[jboss-dev] Refactoring packaging/packages to reduce "signed jar groups"

[Mike Clark]

Hey Dimitris,

 From what I read, sealing implies that packages must be loaded from a 
single jar, signed or not.  We do load the same package from multiple 
jars.  In addition, We should see a "java.lang.SecurityException: 
sealing violation at java.net.URLClassLoader.defineClass()" [1] in the 
case of a sealing violation.   So, I think sealing is a red-herring with 
respect to this discussion.

Cheers,
Mike C.

[1] http://java.sun.com/developer/JDCTechTips/2001/tt0130.html#files

On 02/25/2010 08:49 AM, Dimitris Andreadis wrote:
> Could it be that signing implies package sealing? Can you tried setting explicitly sealing
> to off?
>
> Mike Clark wrote:
>    
>> Hey Adrian,
>>
>>   From reading the links you provided, it doesn't seem to be a sealed
>> package thing.  Indeed, we do not seal the jars.  The error is, for example:
>>
>> 2010-02-25 08:36:00,520 INFO  [org.jboss.web.WebService] (main) Using
>> RMI server codebase: http://127.0.0.1:8083/
>> 2010-02-25 08:36:00,621 WARN
>> [org.jboss.detailed.classloader.ClassLoaderManager] (main) Unexpected
>> error during load of:org.jboss.naming.NamingService
>> java.lang.SecurityException: class "org.jboss.naming.NamingService"'s
>> signer information does not match signer information of other classes in
>> the same package
>>       at java.lang.ClassLoader.checkCerts(ClassLoader.java:776)
>>       at java.lang.ClassLoader.preDefineClass(ClassLoader.java:488)
>>       at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:615)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader.access$200(BaseClassLoader.java:63)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader$2.run(BaseClassLoader.java:572)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader$2.run(BaseClassLoader.java:532)
>>       at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader.loadClassLocally(BaseClassLoader.java:530)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader.loadClassLocally(BaseClassLoader.java:507)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseDelegateLoader.loadClass(BaseDelegateLoader.java:134)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.filter.FilteredDelegateLoader.loadClass(FilteredDelegateLoader.java:131)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.ClassLoadingTask$ThreadTask.run(ClassLoadingTask.java:452)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.ClassLoaderManager.nextTask(ClassLoaderManager.java:267)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.ClassLoaderManager.process(ClassLoaderManager.java:166)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoaderDomain.loadClass(BaseClassLoaderDomain.java:265)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoaderDomain.loadClass(BaseClassLoaderDomain.java:1119)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader.loadClassFromDomain(BaseClassLoader.java:798)
>>       at
>> org.jboss.classloader.spi.base.BaseClassLoader.loadClass(BaseClassLoader.java:441)
>>       at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:252)
>>
>> (This is from line 2 of the server.log when you replace jboss.jar in EAP
>> 5 with an unsigned version.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mike C.
>>
>> On 02/25/2010 07:27 AM, Adrian Brock wrote:
>>      
>>> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 16:50 -0600, Mike Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Hey folks,
>>>>
>>>> The general purpose of this note is to explore refactoring some of our
>>>> jars to reduce some problems that have come about due to our signing
>>>> of jars.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> <snip/>
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> The problem with such a substitution is the fact that a classloader
>>>> will not load classes from a packages that appear in differently
>>>> signed jars.  So, for example, even though class org.jboss.A may only
>>>> occur in an unsigned A.jar, loading it will cause a security exception
>>>> if class org.jboss.B was loaded from a signed B.jar.
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> I don't understand this, what error message are you seeing?
>>>
>>> Signing jars (which is about verifying the bytes have not been
>>> tampered with - and potentially granting additional security
>>> permissions)
>>> http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/deployment/jar/intro.html
>>> has nothing to do with what you describe, which sounds like package
>>> sealing?
>>> http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/deployment/jar/sealman.html
>>>
>>> See definePackage() here:
>>> http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/jbossas/projects/jboss-cl/trunk/classloader/src/main/java/org/jboss/classloader/spi/base/BaseClassLoader.java
>>> for how we currently implement package sealing.
>>>
>>> AFAIK, Package::isSealed(URL) just does an equals check on the URL,
>>> it doesn't look at the CodeSource's certificates.
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> _______________________________________________
>> jboss-development mailing list
>> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>>      
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-development mailing list
> jboss-development at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-development
>