Review request for 8035807: Convert use of sun.misc.BASE64Encoder/Decoder with java.util.Base64

Xueming Shen xueming.shen at
Fri Mar 21 05:54:21 UTC 2014
     It appears sun.misc.BASE64Decoder.decodeBuffer(String) uses 
String's deprecated
     String.getBytes(int srcBegin, int srcEnd, byte[] dst, int 
dstBegin). The proposed change
     now uses the jvm's default charset. It might trigger incompatible 
behavior if the default
     charset is not an ASCII compatible charset.  But if the "Java 
object in LDAP was encoded
     with the platform default charset" (as the new comment suggested), 
the old implementation
     actually did not work on platform that the default encoding is not 
ASCII compatible, such
     as the IBM ebcdic.


On 3/20/14 3:48 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
> On 3/19/14 12:28 PM, Xueming Shen wrote:
>> On 03/19/2014 11:37 AM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>>> Webrev at:
>>> This patch converts the last 2 references to 
>>> sun.misc.BASE64Encoder/Decoder from the jdk repo with 
>>> java.util.Base64.   We should also update the tests and I have filed 
>>> JDK-8037873 for that.
>>> Thanks
>>> Mandy
>> The sun.misc.BASE64En/Decoder is MIME type, so it outputs the \r\n 
>> per 76
>> characters during encoding, and ignores/skip \r or \n when decoding. 
>> The new
>> Base64.getEncoder/Decoder() returns the "basic" Base64 coder, which 
>> it never
>> inserts line separator when output, and throws exception for any 
>> non-base64-
>> alphabet character, including \r and \n.
>> The only disadvantage/incompatibility (j.u.Base64.getMimeDecoer() vs
>> sun.misc.BASE64Decoder) of switching to j.u.Base64 MIME type en/decoder
>> is that the Base64 Mime decoder ignores/skips any non-base64-alphabet
>> (including \r and \n), while sun.misc.BASE64Decoder appears to simply
>> use the init value "-1" for any non-base64-alphabet character for 
>> decoding.
>> I'm not familiar with the use scenario of ldap's Obj class, so I'm 
>> not sure if
>> it matters (if it ever outputs/inputs > 76 character data, or even it 
>> does,if
>> the difference matters).
>> Btw, except getMimeEncoder(int ...) all other Base64.getXXXEn/Decoder()
>> returns singleton, so the de/encoder cache might not be necessary.
> Thanks Sherman.  Vinnie confirms that it should retain the current 
> behavior as there could be long-lived Java object in LDAP encoded with 
> JDK 8 for example and then retrieved with JDK 9.
> Here is the updated webrev:
> Thanks
> Mandy

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list