We Keep Coding

Ignoring System#exit() from reflective call [duplicate]

I am using a third party library that does a System.exit() if it encounters exceptions. I am using the APIs from a jar. Is there anyway that I can prevent the System.exit() call because it causes my application to shutdown? I cannot decompile and recompile the jar after removing the System.exit() because of a lot of other licensing issues. I once came across an answer [to some other question that I do not remember] in stackoverflow that we can use the SecurityManager in Java to do something like this.

You can install a security manager which disables System.exit():
private static class ExitTrappedException extends SecurityException { }
private static void forbidSystemExitCall() {
final SecurityManager securityManager = new SecurityManager() {
public void checkPermission( Permission permission ) {
if( "exitVM".equals( permission.getName() ) ) {
throw new ExitTrappedException() ;
}
}
} ;
System.setSecurityManager( securityManager ) ;
}
private static void enableSystemExitCall() {
System.setSecurityManager( null ) ;
}
Edit: Max points out in comments below that
as of Java 6, the permission name is actually "exitVM."+status, e.g. "exitVM.0".
However, the permission exitVM.* refers to all exit statuses, and exitVM is retained as a shorthand for exitVM.*, so the above code still works (see the documentation for RuntimePermission).

See my reply to How to avoid JFrame EXIT_ON_CLOSE operation to exit the entire application?.
Edit 1: The source that was linked. Demonstrates how to use a SecurityManager to prevent System.exit(n).
import java.awt.*;
import java.awt.event.*;
import java.security.Permission;
/** NoExit demonstrates how to prevent 'child'
applications from ending the VM with a call
to System.exit(0).
#author Andrew Thompson */
public class NoExit extends Frame implements ActionListener {
Button frameLaunch = new Button("Frame"),
exitLaunch = new Button("Exit");
/** Stores a reference to the original security manager. */
ExitManager sm;
public NoExit() {
super("Launcher Application");
sm = new ExitManager( System.getSecurityManager() );
System.setSecurityManager(sm);
setLayout(new GridLayout(0,1));
frameLaunch.addActionListener(this);
exitLaunch.addActionListener(this);
add( frameLaunch );
add( exitLaunch );
pack();
setSize( getPreferredSize() );
}
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent ae) {
if ( ae.getSource()==frameLaunch ) {
TargetFrame tf = new TargetFrame();
} else {
// change back to the standard SM that allows exit.
System.setSecurityManager(
sm.getOriginalSecurityManager() );
// exit the VM when *we* want
System.exit(0);
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
NoExit ne = new NoExit();
ne.setVisible(true);
}
}
/** This example frame attempts to System.exit(0)
on closing, we must prevent it from doing so. */
class TargetFrame extends Frame {
static int x=0, y=0;
TargetFrame() {
super("Close Me!");
add(new Label("Hi!"));
addWindowListener( new WindowAdapter() {
public void windowClosing(WindowEvent we) {
System.out.println("Bye!");
System.exit(0);
}
});
pack();
setSize( getPreferredSize() );
setLocation(++x*10,++y*10);
setVisible(true);
}
}
/** Our custom ExitManager does not allow the VM
to exit, but does allow itself to be replaced by
the original security manager.
#author Andrew Thompson */
class ExitManager extends SecurityManager {
SecurityManager original;
ExitManager(SecurityManager original) {
this.original = original;
}
/** Deny permission to exit the VM. */
public void checkExit(int status) {
throw( new SecurityException() );
}
/** Allow this security manager to be replaced,
if fact, allow pretty much everything. */
public void checkPermission(Permission perm) {
}
public SecurityManager getOriginalSecurityManager() {
return original;
}
}

The previous code sample is partially correct, but I found that it ended up blocking my code's access to files. To get around that problem, I wrote my SecurityManager a little differently:
public class MySecurityManager extends SecurityManager {
private SecurityManager baseSecurityManager;
public MySecurityManager(SecurityManager baseSecurityManager) {
this.baseSecurityManager = baseSecurityManager;
}
#Override
public void checkPermission(Permission permission) {
if (permission.getName().startsWith("exitVM")) {
throw new SecurityException("System exit not allowed");
}
if (baseSecurityManager != null) {
baseSecurityManager.checkPermission(permission);
} else {
return;
}
}
}
In my case, I needed to prevent a 3rd party library from terminating the VM. But there were also some grails tests that were calling System.exit. So, I wrote my code so that it only activated the custom security manager immediately before the call to the 3rd party library (not a common event) and then immediately restored the original security manager, if any, afterwards.
It's all a little ugly. Ideally, I would have preferred to simply remove the System.exit code, but I do not have access to the 3rd party library's source code.

Using SecurityManager to disallow System.exit() calls is not perfect, for at least 2 reasons:
Java applications running with and without SecurityManager enabled are very different. That's why it needs to be turned off eventually, but it cannot be done with System.setSecurityManager(null). This call will lead to another security permission check, that will inevitably fail, because application code (SecurityManager subclass) is on the top of the calling stack.
All the Java applications are multi-threaded, and other threads can do various things between forbidSystemExitCall() and enableSystemExitCall(). Some of these things can be protected with security permission checks, which will fail for the very same reasons as described above. If checkExit() is overridden instead of [much more generic] checkPermission(), it will cover most of the cases, though.
The only way (that I know) to resolve this is to grant all the privileged to the SecurityManager subclass. It will very likely require it to be loaded by a separate class loader, e.g. bootstrap (null) class loader.

how can i forbid a jar create new thread in java

I have create a simple plugin system that allows others upload their plugin's jar, and the plugin system will load it and execute some code in it.
the plugin system will get a subclass of Function<Input, Output> to execute the loaded plugin logic, but I do not want that Function to create new Thread or do some danger action like System.exit. how can I forbid this action?
I have found the AccessController or SecurityManager in Java, how to use it to implement my intent.

Like you said, you can add a security Manager. Something like below: You can put your code in try catch block and catch your custom security exception thrown. This code below runs in loop and keeps on calling System.exit(1);
import java.security.Permission;
public class TestPreventSystemExit {
public static void main(String[] args) {
forbidSystemExitCall();
while (true) {
try {
System.exit(1);
} catch (Exception ex) {
}
}
}
private static class PreventExitException extends SecurityException {
}
private static void forbidSystemExitCall() {
final SecurityManager securityManager = new SecurityManager() {
public void checkPermission(Permission permission) {
if (permission.getName().indexOf("exitVM") >= 0) {
System.out.println("Why you did this to me? :)");
throw new PreventExitException();
}
}
};
System.setSecurityManager(securityManager);
}
}

For System.exit() - see the other answer.
For preventing the starting of threads: possible, but requires to extend the SecurityManager class - see here.
AccessController is more about how a client would write code that is potentially checked. It is not something that you, as the "owner" of the JVM can make usage of (see here). So it doesn't help with your problem.

Multiple JFrame application, how do I bring them all to front together?

My users like having multiple JFrames; it allows them to resize the different components and place them wherever they want on the screen. However, I have a request to make all the child windows come to the front together... in other words, lets say they maximize another window in front of all the windows, and then use the task bar to click on just one of the JFrames. How can I set it so that they all come to the front? Note: it is also possible to close the child windows; if they are actually hidden, I do not want them to come to the front. I have a class ApplicationModel that keeps track of whether a window is hidden or not.
Things I've tried:
Using windowActivated() and focusGained() to try to bring them all to the front. This usually results in an infinite loop. The problem is that my eventing framework sends these requests off the Event Dispatch Thread, so any sort of blocking with an AtomicBoolean doesn't last long enough.
The main problem is not that I can't make them come to the front... I have made them come to the front. The problem is that they KEEP trying to come to the front, as bringing a window to the front throws the focusGained and windowActivated events, which creates an endless loop...
Making one window the master, and making the others a JDialog. Unfortunately, either the windows are modeless (and therefore don't come to front with the master window), or they are modal, (and therefore block the master window).
How can I fix either of these problems, or is there an entirely different third solution?

You can use a boolean field as a flag to prevent the infinite loop:
private boolean movingAllFramesToFront;
public void windowActivated(WindowEvent event) {
if (movingAllFramesToFront) {
return;
}
movingAllFramesToFront = true;
List<Frame> frames = getAllApplicationFrames();
for (Frame frame : frames) {
if (!applicationModel.isHidden(frame)) {
frame.toFront();
}
}
event.getWindow().toFront();
event.getWindow().requestFocus();
EventQueue.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
movingAllFramesToFront = false;
}
);
}
Another thing you can try is the new autoRequestFocus property introduced in Java 1.7. I have never tried using it, but here's my understanding of how it works:
public void windowActivated(WindowEvent event) {
final List<Frame> frames = getAllApplicationFrames();
for (Frame frame : frames) {
if (!applicationModel.isHidden(frame)) {
frame.setAutoRequestFocus(false);
frame.toFront();
}
}
EventQueue.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
for (Frame frame : frames) {
if (!applicationModel.isHidden(frame)) {
frame.setAutoRequestFocus(true);
}
}
}
);
}

I have an application with a lot of windows and had a problem similar to yours. My workaround is:
#Override
public void windowActivated(WindowEvent e) {
if (e.getOppositeWindow() == null) {
//front every window
}
}
First I created a class "SlveFrame" (Slve being the name of my app), a child of "JFrame".
public class SlveFrame extends JFrame implements WindowListener {
static ArrayList<SlveFrame> frames = new ArrayList<SlveFrame>();
public SlveFrame () {
addWindowListener(this); / /to make JFrame fire WindowListener's method
}
/ /... every method added from WindowListener
#Override
public void windowActivated(WindowEvent e) {
if (e.getOppositeWindow() == null) { // return null if window is not from my (or Your) work
for (SlveFrame frame : frames) { // if you have no idea what this is, look for "for each loop java" in google
frame.toFront();
}
}
}
/**
* The use of SlveFrame is almost the same as Jframe
*/
#Override
public void setVisible (boolean b) {
if (b)
frames.add(this);
else
frames.remove(this); // may raise an exception if you're not careful
super.setVisible(b); // or your window will simply not be visible.
}
#Override
public void dispose () {
frames.dispose(this) // may raise an exception you'll want to handle
}
}
The trick being that WindowEvent.getOppositeWIndow() returns a Jframe if the JFrame (or child class) is from your own program, meaning that if you switch to another program or app (such as eclipse, Firefox or a text editor) then back to any of your windows, then a call to getOppositeWindow() will return a 'null'. A simple if (e.getOppositeWindow()) makes it fairly easy to determine whether your window gain focus in condition that would require you to bring every window to the front, or rather to let everything be.
The overriding of setVisible (boolean b) and dispose () are optional but allow the dev to use it as a regular window.
I hope i could be of some help. Sincerly ~a lama

Java SecurityManager #Override public void checkPermission(Permission perm)

I'm building a SWING application and also need to write a custom SecurityManager. If I write an empty class which extends SecurityManager like this
public class Sandbox extends SecurityManager {}
it works fine, meaning that the GUI is rendered correctly and all privileges like I/O are revoked.
However I need to customize the checkPermission method and whenever I override it nothing works anymore...
Why even something like this shouldn't work??
public class Sandbox extends SecurityManager {
#Overide
public void checkPermission(Permission perm) {
super.checkPermission(perm);
}
}
Update: a very basic example that shows the problem is this
public static void main(String[] args) {
System.setSecurityManager(new SecurityManager() {
#Override
public void checkPermission(Permission p) {
if (some_condition_here) {
// Do something here
} else {
// Resort to default implementation
super.checkPermission(p);
}
}
});
new JFrame().setVisible(true);
}
Removing the "checkPermission" method the application works correctly, but I really can't get my head around this.

The permissions are granted based on all the code on the stack. All callers must have the required permission. If you override the method and call the superclass method, your code is on the stack as well which implies that your codebase (where your custom SecurityManager belongs to) must have the permission you (your callers) ask for.
That’s the difference between overriding or not. If you don’t override that method only the (possibly privileged) caller’s code is on the stack and it will get the requested permission. If you override that method your code is also on the stack and must have the permission as well.
So if you want to implement a custom SecurityManager which invokes the inherited check method you must configure the inherited (policy based) logic to give your SecurityManager all permissions it should be able to grant. It’s recommended to separate the SecurityManager from the rest of the application into a different codebase so only the SecurityManager and nothing else gets the generous permissions.

If you call the superclass' checkPermission(p) you didn't have to override the class in the first place. Comment it out, then it works.
The superclas' calls java.security.AccessController.checkPermission(perm) and that seems to throw a java.security.AccessControlException, when not invoked by java.lang.SecurityManager
in my case it says:
Could not load Logmanager "null"
java.security.AccessControlException: access denied (java.util.PropertyPermission java.util.logging.manager read)
etc.
public class SecurityManagerExample
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
System.setSecurityManager(new SecurityManager()
{
#Override
public void checkPermission(Permission p)
{
//super.checkPermission(p);
}
});
new JFrame().setVisible(true);
}
}
I found a tutorial on how to write a security manager. I'd also recommend you to go through the java doc and the examples provided by oracle.
UPDATE
Take a look at the method summary and override the functionality you want to forbid.
As I found out you also need to explicitly allow the functionality you want to have.
Here an example:
public class SecurityManagerExample
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
System.setSecurityManager(new SecurityManager()
{
#Override
public void checkWrite(String file) {
// no exception is thrown, i. e. creating files is allowed in general
}
#Override
public void checkDelete(String file)
{
if (file.equals("test.xml"))
{
throw new SecurityException("Not allowed to delete test.xml!");
}
}
});
File f = new File("test.xml");
try
{
f.createNewFile();
}
catch (IOException e)
{
}
f.delete();
}
}
OUTPUT
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.SecurityException: Not allowed to delete test.xml!
at main.SecurityManagerExample$1.checkDelete(SecurityManagerExample.java:60)
at java.io.File.delete(File.java:902)
at main.SecurityManagerExample.main(SecurityManagerExample.java:74)

Correctly handling a Reload and Restart from the AppletViewer

When my applet starts up the first time from a clean environment, things work the way I expect them to. I spawn two threads, one for generic processing, and one for graphics. I do all GUI manipulation calls from the event dispatching thread. Start/Stop is handled correctly from the appletviewer, but Restart/Reload is not. I have a Canvas called drawCanvas as the only Component in my Applet's content pane, and I use double buffering to draw to it.
I observe the problem here:
public void start() {
/* ... some stuff */
executeOnEDTAndWait(
new Thread() {
#Override
public void run() {
/* ... more stuff ... */
setupDrawCanvas();
if( drawCanvas.isDisplayable() ) {
drawCanvas.createBufferStrategy(2);
/* ... some more stuff */
} else {
/* This is where it runs into difficulties */
}
/* ... */
Where setupDrawCanvas is defined like this:
private void setupDrawCanvas() {
setVisible(false);
setIgnoreRepaint(true);
getContentPane().removeAll();
drawCanvas = new Canvas();
drawCanvas.setName("drawCanvas");
drawCanvas.setSize(
newDrawCanvasDimension.width,
newDrawCanvasDimension.height);
drawCanvas.setIgnoreRepaint(true);
getContentPane().add(drawCanvas);
getContentPane().setVisible(true);
drawCanvas.setVisible(true);
setVisible(true);
}
Also, here's the relevant code in destroy()
public void destroy() {
/* .. some stuff .. */
/* dispose of drawCanvas */
drawCanvas.setVisible(false);
if( drawCanvas.getBufferStrategy() != null ) {
drawCanvas.getBufferStrategy().dispose();
}
/* reset and disable the applet's GUI */
setVisible(false);
getContentPane().removeAll();
removeAll();
/* .. some more stuff */
The first time through, everything works fine. When I do a restart from the appletviewer, first stop() is called which causes all my threads to enter into wait states. Then destroy() is called which wakes all my threads up again and lets them exit, as well as do and invokeAndWait() on the EDT to clean up my widgets and do a setVisible(false). So after destroy completes the appletviewer calls init/start again and the process repeats exactly as before, except it fails in start() at the region I noted above.
Something that I noticed which made very little sense to me was that if I cloned the applet using the appletviewer and then reloaded the clone, everything would work as expected when I attempted to restart or reload the clone the first time, but would crash with an exception the second time.
Something else I noticed while trying to debug this problem is that the appletviewer and a browser act completely differently as hosts to my applet; they don't even call init() and start() under the same conditions. Also, restart and reload seem to be nothing more than a call to stop() -> destroy() -> init() -> start() but with subtle modifications to the execution environment.
So my question is, what is the significance of the restart and reload operations (i.e. when are they used) and is it a problem that my applet fails in the appletviewer when they occur?

Nice Question.
To answer this question we need understand the blocks of java code first.
we have a anonymous, static blocks before construtor that will be executed.
package com.test;
import java.applet.Applet;
import java.awt.*;
public class AppletTest extends Applet {
{
System.out.println("I m Anonymous block");
}
static {
System.out.println("I m static block");
}
public AppletTest()
{
System.out.println("I m constructor");
}
public void init()
{
System.out.println("init");
}
public void start()
{
System.out.println("start");
}
public void stop()
{
System.out.println("stop");
}
public void destroy()
{
System.out.println("destory");
}
public void paint(Graphics g)
{
g.drawString("test Applet",10,10);
}
}
invocation:
<applet code="AppletTest.class" height=300 width=300></applet>
when running this class using appletviewer you can note the difference.
Applet running for the first time you will get
I m static block
I m Anonymous block
I m constructor
init
start
while doing applet restart -
stop
destory
init
start
and on applet reload
stop
destory
I m Anonymous block
I m constructor
init
start
for your second question, applet does not guarantee the same output on different OS, network and hardware components.