Home/ Questions/Q 7618783
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-31T03:29:39+00:00

I’m trying to understand the security model used when the JVM is asked to

  • 0

I’m trying to understand the security model used when the JVM is asked to load classes.

From the JVM specification on Sandboxing, I’m given to believe that a standard JVM implementation should maintain at least one other ClassLoader, independent of the primordial ClassLoader. This is used to load the application class files (from a provided classpath for example).

If the class is requested from the ClassLoader that is not in it’s namespace, java/lang/String for example, then it forwards the request to the primordial ClassLoader, which attempts to load the class from the Java API, if its not there then it throws a NoClassDefFoundError.

Am I right in thinking that the primordial ClassLoader only loads classes from the Java API namespace, and all other classes are loaded via a separate ClassLoader implementation?

And that this makes the loading of classes more secure because it means that a malicious class cannot masquerade as a member of the Java API (lets say java/lang/Virus) because this is a protected namespace, and cannot be used in the current ClassLoader?

But is there anything to prevent the Classes of the Java API being replaced by malicious classes, or would that be detected during class verification?

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    For historical reasons the names used for class loaders are a little peculiar. The boot class loader loads the systems classes. The system class loader, by default, loads classes from the class path not the system classes. The system classes are in jre/lib (mostly in rt.jar), endorsed directories and anywhere added through -Xbootclasspath.

    On the Sun/Oracle JRE, rt.jar contains classes with packages starting with java., javax., sun., com.sun., org.omg, org.w3c and org.xml.

    Untrusted code (including configuration) should not be able to add to the system classes. Some packages name prefixed may be restricted through a security property. The java. prefix is specially protected against for non-technical reasons.

    Generally a class loader will delegate to its parent before defining a new class, preventing any classes from an ancestor loader from being replaced. Java EE recommends (even though Java SE bans) having some class loaders prefer their own classes, typically to use a more up to date API or a different implementation. This allows shadowing of classes, but only as seen through that loader (and its children). All other classes continue to link to the original.

    • 0