[jira] [Comment Edited] (SUREFIRE-583) When forking and specifying a JVM, that JVM's security policy's JCE providers are not loaded, JAVA_HOME's are

["Tibor Digana (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14585778#comment-14585778 ] 

Tibor Digana edited comment on SUREFIRE-583 at 6/15/15 11:01 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

No answer and reproducible project attached after over three months.


was (Author: tibor17):
No answer and reproducible project available attached over three months.

> When forking and specifying a JVM, that JVM's security policy's JCE providers are not loaded, JAVA_HOME's are
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SUREFIRE-583
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SUREFIRE-583
>             Project: Maven Surefire
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: process forking
>    Affects Versions: 2.4.2
>         Environment: Windows, JAVA_HOME is Sun JDK 1.6.0u16, forked JVM is IBM JDK for WAS 6.1
>            Reporter: Justin Searls
>            Assignee: Tibor Digana
>             Fix For: Backlog
>
>
> Premise: 
> My test needs to run on the IBM JDK to work, but for other reasons I need to actually build on the Sun JVM. My application's tests are relying on 
> libraries that use a message digest ("SHA", not "SHA1") that I can only find support for in the BouncyCastle JCE provider. 
> Setup:
> 1. So I've identified in my plugin configuration something like <jvm>/path/to/ibm/jdk/jre/bin/javaw.exe</jvm>
> 2. Added BouncyCastle JCE provider jar to /path/to/ibm/jdk/jre/lib/ext
> 3. Setup BouncyCastle as the sole JCE provider in /path/to/ibm/jdk/jre/lib/security/java.security
> Expected Result: Designated IBM JVM would look for its java.security file and load its jre/lib/ext JARs when executing tests
> Actual Result: No such effect. After going through the same setup on my Sun JDK (which I'm running Maven with), that did have the effect of actually providing that provider and getting past the error I was experiencing.
> It seems to me that if you fork to a different JVM, that JVM's security policy should be used. Given the complexity of this API, however, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that there's a major technical hurdle in implementing this, however.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)