8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation #19862

ascarpino · 2024-06-24T15:57:57Z

Hi,

I need a review to change the a fragment buffer size miscalculation error. This appears when there are large handshake messages and hasn't been observed during application data. This was found during testing of the NewSessionTicket change in JDK-8328608. There is no regression test as the failure hasn't shown to fail every time.

thanks

Tony

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-8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation (Bug - P3)

Reviewers

Daniel Jeliński (@djelinski - Reviewer)
Sibabrata Sahoo (@sisahoo - Committer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19862/head:pull/19862
$ git checkout pull/19862

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/19862
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/19862/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 19862

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 19862

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19862.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2024-06-24T15:58:32Z

👋 Welcome back ascarpino! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2024-06-24T15:59:06Z

@ascarpino This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation

Reviewed-by: djelinski, ssahoo

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 136 new commits pushed to the master branch:

25c3845: 8333133: Simplify QuickSort::sort
c66f785: 8334505: RISC-V: Several tests fail when MaxVectorSize does not match VM_Version::_initial_vector_length
f101e15: 8333583: Crypto-XDH.generateSecret regression after JDK-8329538
b3bf31a: 8333542: Breakpoint in parallel code does not work
86b0cf2: 8334653: ISO 4217 Amendment 177 Update
861aefc: 8334418: Update IANA Language Subtag Registry to Version 2024-06-14
f8bf470: 8334810: Redo: Un-ProblemList LocaleProvidersRun and CalendarDataRegression
933eaba: 8334629: [BACKOUT] PhaseIdealLoop::conditional_move is too conservative
7429c37: 8334598: Default classlist in JDK is not deterministic after JDK-8293980
9c89f08: 8334421: assert(!oldbox->is_unbalanced()) failed: this should not be called for unbalanced region
... and 126 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/301bd7085654328f941c462bc786e995051d1a9c...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

openjdk · 2024-06-24T15:59:32Z

@ascarpino The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

security

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

mlbridge · 2024-06-24T16:02:33Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (daee7cdd)
00: Full (ec5fe598)

djelinski

LGTM. Thanks for fixing this!

In order to test this fix, we would need to trigger a situation where count != position, and it seems to be impossible, because we flush after every single message. We don't need to flush that often; I'll log a ticket for this.

djelinski

Actually, I think this line needs to be changed too.

djelinski · 2024-06-25T08:14:10Z

src/java.base/share/classes/sun/security/ssl/SSLSocketOutputRecord.java

@@ -169,7 +169,8 @@ void encodeHandshake(byte[] source,
            for (int limit = (offset + length); offset < limit;) {

                int remains = (limit - offset) + (count - position);


Suggested change

int remains = (limit - offset) + (count - position);

int remains = (limit - offset);

I tried this and it caused a lockup in one of the tests. I see why your think this is the right change, but it isn't proving out in the testing

That's very interesting! Which test was it? Was it with or without #19465?

I do run the tests layered on the current #19465, even though this PR is separate.

sisahoo

Hi @sisahoo, thanks for making a comment in an OpenJDK project!

All comments and discussions in the OpenJDK Community must be made available under the OpenJDK Terms of Use. If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please Use "Add GitHub user sisahoo" for the summary.

If you are not an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, simply check the box below to accept the OpenJDK Terms of Use for your comments.

I agree to the OpenJDK Terms of Use for all comments I make in a project in the OpenJDK GitHub organization.

Your comment will be automatically restored once you have accepted the OpenJDK Terms of Use.

djelinski

Thanks for making the change. LGTM.

Is it possible to add a Test?

I don't think it is possible; right now we flush after every handshake message. As a result, count == position every time we enter this loop, so the change doesn't really change anything. The problem only surfaced in #19465, and only when multiple NewSessionTicket messages exceeding 16KB were sent without flushing.

ascarpino · 2024-06-26T22:27:33Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2024-06-26T22:28:34Z

Going to push as commit 07bc523.
Since your change was applied there have been 153 commits pushed to the master branch:

4ebb771: 8334769: Shenandoah: Move CodeCache_lock close to its use in ShenandoahConcurrentNMethodIterator
817edcb: 8331411: Shenandoah: Reconsider spinning duration in ShenandoahLock
bffc848: 8333755: NumberFormat integer only parsing breaks when format has suffix
b5d5896: 8335108: Build error after JDK-8333658 due to class templates
5883a20: 8334437: De-duplicate ProxyMethod list creation
8591eff: 8332103: since-checker - Add missing @ since tags to java.desktop
8374d16: 8335006: C2 SuperWord: add JMH benchmark VectorLoadToStoreForwarding.java
4ffc5e6: 8326705: Test CertMsgCheck.java fails to find alert certificate_required
efb905e: 8334618: ubsan: support setting additional ubsan check options
b2ac725: 8327380: Add tests for Shenandoah barrier expansion optimization
... and 143 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/301bd7085654328f941c462bc786e995051d1a9c...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2024-06-26T22:28:40Z

@ascarpino Pushed as commit 07bc523.

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

ascarpino added 2 commits June 19, 2024 15:56

Incorrect calculation

3ec3918

copyright

ec5fe59

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 24, 2024

openjdk bot added the security security-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 24, 2024

djelinski approved these changes Jun 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 25, 2024

djelinski suggested changes Jun 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 25, 2024

updated changes

daee7cd

sisahoo reviewed Jun 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

djelinski approved these changes Jun 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 26, 2024

sisahoo approved these changes Jun 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 26, 2024

openjdk bot closed this Jun 26, 2024

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 26, 2024

ascarpino deleted the fragLimit branch February 14, 2025 21:15

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation #19862

8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation #19862

Uh oh!

ascarpino commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Uh oh!

djelinski Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

ascarpino Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

djelinski Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

ascarpino Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

sisahoo left a comment •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Loading

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Uh oh!

ascarpino commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

		@@ -169,7 +169,8 @@ void encodeHandshake(byte[] source,
		for (int limit = (offset + length); offset < limit;) {

		int remains = (limit - offset) + (count - position);

	int remains = (limit - offset) + (count - position);
	int remains = (limit - offset);

8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation #19862

8334670: SSLSocketOutputRecord buffer miscalculation #19862

Uh oh!

Conversation

ascarpino commented Jun 24, 2024 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Webrev

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2024

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jun 24, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

djelinski Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ascarpino Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

djelinski Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ascarpino Jun 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sisahoo left a comment • edited by bridgekeeper bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

djelinski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ascarpino commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 26, 2024

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ascarpino commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Jun 24, 2024 •

edited

Loading

sisahoo left a comment •

edited by bridgekeeper bot

Loading