Bug 1417424

Same issue with latest stable packages:

$ grep NSS_LIBDIR /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.121-1.b14.fc24.x86_64/jre/lib/security/nss.cfg
nssLibraryDirectory = @NSS_LIBDIR@
$ rpm -q java-1.8.0-openjdk
java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.121-1.b14.fc24.x86_64

Andrew, is this config file needed at all?

There used to be :

# Install nss.cfg right away as we will be using the JRE above
cp -a %{SOURCE8} $JAVA_HOME/jre/lib/security/
sed -i -e s:@NSS_LIBDIR@:%{NSS_LIBDIR}:g $JAVA_HOME/jre/lib/security/nss.cfg

Its somehow no longer there.

s/SOURCE8/SOURCE11 for current version

(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #3)
> There used to be :
> 
> # Install nss.cfg right away as we will be using the JRE above
> cp -a %{SOURCE8} $JAVA_HOME/jre/lib/security/
> sed -i -e s:@NSS_LIBDIR@:%{NSS_LIBDIR}:g $JAVA_HOME/jre/lib/security/nss.cfg
> 
> Its somehow no longer there.

It seems it never made it to java-1.8.0-openjdk at all. The config file was added, but not the substitution nor the addition of the PKCS11 provider to java.security.
It's broken in RHEL's java-1.8.0-openjdk too. java-1.6.0-openjdk is also broken, but in a different way. java-1.7.0-openjdk is the only version that seems to have this correct.

nss.cfg is a configuration file for the PKCS11 provider. It's called by the addition of a line to java.security:

#security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg

However, that's not present in java-1.8.0-openjdk so the file never gets read and thus the invalid contents are never used.

As it's been broken for the entire lifetime of java-1.8.0-openjdk, I suggest just deleting it.

Assigning to Jiri so he can decide whether to delete or fix it in Fedora.

RHEL bugs 1429774 and 1429775 created to fix this in RHEL.

Hi Andrew, just to verify:

When  both java.security contains security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg  *and* nss.xfg is valid, then the list of providers looks like:

SUN
SunRsaSign
SunEC
SunJSSE
SunJCE
SunJGSS
SunSASL
XMLDSig
SunPCSC
SunPKCS11-NSS

When nss.cfg is removed/broken ans still security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 is present, then JVM crashes


And when security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 is missing, then nss.cfg does nto meter, but the list is SunPKCS11-NSS short.


So imho the jdks are broken a bit, and  security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg should be there and so nss.cfg should be valid.

Thank you for any advice.

(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #7)
> Hi Andrew, just to verify:
> 
> When  both java.security contains
> security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11
> ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg  *and* nss.xfg is valid, then the list of
> providers looks like:
> 
> SUN
> SunRsaSign
> SunEC
> SunJSSE
> SunJCE
> SunJGSS
> SunSASL
> XMLDSig
> SunPCSC
> SunPKCS11-NSS
> 
> When nss.cfg is removed/broken ans still
> security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 is present, then JVM
> crashes
> 
> 
> And when security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11 is missing, then
> nss.cfg does nto meter, but the list is SunPKCS11-NSS short.
> 
> 
> So imho the jdks are broken a bit, and 
> security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11
> ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg should be there and so nss.cfg should be
> valid.
> 
> Thank you for any advice.

Not sure what I'm actually being asked...

java-1.7.0-openjdk has the correct setup, with nss.cfg correctly generated and a commented out line in java.security. nss.cfg has also now been fixed in java-1.8.0-openjdk.

That's if you want to follow RHEL and retain these files. I don't think we should drop things mid-stream there, but you have the option of doing that with Fedora instead if you prefer.

The propagation of libdir fixed, and system nss returned back to java.security in commented out state.

(In reply to Andrew John Hughes from comment #10)
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #7)
> > Hi Andrew, just to verify:
> > 
> > When  both java.security contains
> > security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11
> > ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg  *and* nss.xfg is valid, then the list of
> > providers looks like:
...
> 
> Not sure what I'm actually being asked...
> 
> java-1.7.0-openjdk has the correct setup, with nss.cfg correctly generated
> and a commented out line in java.security. nss.cfg has also now been fixed
> in java-1.8.0-openjdk.

Yes, commented out. Why?
> 
> That's if you want to follow RHEL and retain these files. I don't think we
> should drop things mid-stream there, but you have the option of doing that
> with Fedora instead if you prefer.

yes, thats what I wont. Tyvm for confirmation!

(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #12)
> (In reply to Andrew John Hughes from comment #10)
> > (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #7)
> > > Hi Andrew, just to verify:
> > > 
> > > When  both java.security contains
> > > security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11
> > > ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg  *and* nss.xfg is valid, then the list of
> > > providers looks like:
> ...
> > 
> > Not sure what I'm actually being asked...
> > 
> > java-1.7.0-openjdk has the correct setup, with nss.cfg correctly generated
> > and a commented out line in java.security. nss.cfg has also now been fixed
> > in java-1.8.0-openjdk.
> 
> Yes, commented out. Why?

The memory leak in that provider.

(In reply to Andrew John Hughes from comment #13)
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Andrew John Hughes from comment #10)
> > > (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #7)
> > > > Hi Andrew, just to verify:
> > > > 
> > > > When  both java.security contains
> > > > security.provider.10=sun.security.pkcs11.SunPKCS11
> > > > ${java.home}/lib/security/nss.cfg  *and* nss.xfg is valid, then the list of
> > > > providers looks like:
> > ...
> > > 
> > > Not sure what I'm actually being asked...
> > > 
> > > java-1.7.0-openjdk has the correct setup, with nss.cfg correctly generated
> > > and a commented out line in java.security. nss.cfg has also now been fixed
> > > in java-1.8.0-openjdk.
> > 
> > Yes, commented out. Why?
> 
> The memory leak in that provider.


So that should be the statement.

Provider is present, is working, but is disabled due to known issue. 

TYVM!

This message is a reminder that Fedora 25 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 25. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '25'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not
able to fix it before Fedora 25 is end of life. If you would still like
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Fedora 25 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-12-12. Fedora 25 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.