8301793: AlgorithmId should not encode a missing parameters field as NULL unless hardcoded

[varada1110]

In jdk17, ML-KEM and ML-DSA keys there are no algorithm parameters but adds a NULL to the encoding when it shouldn’t. With this backport the algorithms that don't need parameters, the NULL is omitted as expected.

---

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
• JDK-8301793 needs maintainer approval

Issue

• JDK-8301793: AlgorithmId should not encode a missing parameters field as NULL unless hardcoded (Enhancement - P4 - Requested)

Reviewers

• Weijun Wang (@wangweij - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/3615/head:pull/3615
$ git checkout pull/3615

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/3615
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev.git pull/3615/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 3615

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 3615

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/pull/3615.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back varadam! 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]

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

[openjdk]

This backport pull request has now been updated with issue from the original commit.

[mlbridge]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (5d6a1bfa)

[varada1110]

/approval 8301793 request the backport fix where the AlgorithmId should omit the parameters field when it is not required, rather than encoding it as NULL, unless the algorithm explicitly mandates. JTREG testing successful for sun/security

[openjdk]

@varada1110
8301793: The approval request has been created successfully.

[GoeLin]

Hi Varada,
please first get a review, then label for approval.
Please edit the description of the PR and tell why this is not clean.
I'm not sure this is a good backport. Please tell in the approval comment in JBS why you
want to backport this and give a risk assessment.

[varada1110]

Hi @seanjmullan ,
Could you please review this PR?

[seanjmullan]

Hi @seanjmullan , Could you please review this PR?

@varada1110 I'm not actively participating in this project. You will need to find another Reviewer.

[phohensee]

You might ask @weijun, who fixed the original issue.

[varada1110]

Hi @wangweij,
Could you please review this PR?

[wangweij]

The change looks good to me. Sorry for the late review.

[openjdk]

⚠️ @varada1110 This change is now ready for you to apply for maintainer approval. This can be done directly in each associated issue or by using the /approval command.

[varada1110]

Thank you @wangweij for the review
/approval 8301793 request the backport fix where the AlgorithmId should omit the parameters field when it is not required, rather than encoding it as NULL, unless the algorithm explicitly mandates. JTREG testing successful for sun/security

[openjdk]

@varada1110
8301793: The approval request was already up to date.

[GoeLin]

Hi @varada1110
please state in the PR comment why this is not clean.
please give a reason why you want this in 17 (besides telling this fixes the error it is supposed to fix...).
GHA and the related tests are a minimum. Did you do any other testing?