Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation #1495

ganadist · 2019-03-22T08:48:31Z

When enum value was obfuscated by proguard, EnumTypeAdapter raise NoSuchFieldException, even if apply SerializedName annotation.
Because EnumTypeAdapter cannot find obfuscated enum constant field with its name.
But without this workaround, there is no way to obfuscate enum name.

JakeWharton · 2019-03-22T13:15:32Z

Test case?

ganadist · 2019-03-22T19:37:56Z

I tried to integrate proguard obfuscation on testcase like this.

ganadist@251ec47

And intent of this mvn rule are this order.

copy-resources (pre-obfuscate-class)
proguard (default)
copy-resources (post-obfuscate-class)

But order of plugin execution does not work as intended.

copy-resources (pre-obfuscate-class)
copy-resources (post-obfuscate-class)
proguard (default)

Can I get any idea?

JakeWharton · 2019-03-22T19:40:46Z

You don't need to integrate ProGuard. Just specify a different name and ensure it's honored in the JSON output.

…

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 3:37 PM YOUNG HO CHA (aka ganachoco) < ***@***.***> wrote: I tried to integrate proguard obfuscation on testcase like this. ***@***.*** <ganadist@251ec47> And intent of this mvn rule are this order. - copy-resources (pre-obfuscate-class) - proguard (default) - copy-resources (post-obfuscate-class) But order of plugin execution does not work as intended. - copy-resources (pre-obfuscate-class) - copy-resources (post-obfuscate-class) - proguard (default) Can I get any idea? — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1495 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEEEabvLIMEqbJOJAtqlKXYhGQvUzj4ks5vZTEVgaJpZM4cDGDK> .

ganadist · 2019-03-23T00:56:03Z

Just specify a different name and ensure it's honored in the JSON output.

Gson has already com.google.gson.functional.testEnumCaseMapping() testcase.

ganadist · 2019-03-23T01:10:33Z

I updated first conversation comment of this PR. because it could be misleading.

inder123 · 2019-03-24T01:11:32Z

I ran into this problem as well. This is a good fix. Let's add a testcase.

ganadist · 2019-03-25T08:56:51Z

To verify this change, enum class in testcase must be obfuscated by proguard.
And I updated testcase on ganadist@1b65e3a , added to check enum class is obfuscated.

But it still has a problem to integrate proguard. :(

ganadist · 2019-04-07T08:50:06Z

Proguard integration on Maven testcase is pretty dirty, but.

Running com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.001 sec

$ cat gson/target/proguard_map.txt
com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest -> com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest:
    com.google.gson.Gson gson -> a
    void <init>() -> <init>
    void setUp() -> setUp
    void testEnumClassWithObfuscated() -> testEnumClassWithObfuscated
com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender -> com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender:
    com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender MALE -> a
    com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender FEMALE -> b
    com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender[] $VALUES -> c
    com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender[] values() -> values
    com.google.gson.functional.EnumWithObfuscatedTest$Gender valueOf(java.lang.String) -> valueOf
    void <init>(java.lang.String,int) -> <init>
    void <clinit>() -> <clinit>

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-09T21:40:45Z

gson/src/main/java/com/google/gson/internal/bind/TypeAdapters.java

+        throw new AssertionError(e);
+      } catch (NullPointerException e) {
+        throw new AssertionError(e);
+      } catch (ExceptionInInitializerError e) {


Why catch this?

For https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/reflect/Field.html#get(java.lang.Object)

Yes, but only because the method can throw the error does not mean that it should be caught here. I assume if that error actually occurred it could also happen in the non-Proguard specific code and there it is not caught either. So in my opinion it should not be caught here.

(Though note that I am not a maintainer of this project)

Fixed at eba1415

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-09T21:40:56Z

gson/src/main/java/com/google/gson/internal/bind/TypeAdapters.java

-      } catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
+      } catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
+        throw new AssertionError(e);
+      } catch (NullPointerException e) {


Why catch this?

for https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/lang/reflect/Field.html#get(java.lang.Object)

NullPointerException - if the specified object is null and the field is an instance field.

But the enum constants are static fields so this should not be possible.

Fixed at eba1415

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-09T21:53:33Z

gson/src/main/java/com/google/gson/internal/bind/TypeAdapters.java

+          if (!field.isEnumConstant()) {
+            continue;
+          }
+          field.setAccessible(true);


Why make the field accessible? Enum element fields are public so making them accessible should not be necessary.

Without this line, unittests failed with following error.

Failed tests: testCollectionOfEnumsDeserialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): AssertionError (GSON 2.8.6-SNAPSHOT): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final" testTopLevelEnumDeserialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): AssertionError (GSON 2.8.6-SNAPSHOT): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final" testClassWithEnumFieldSerialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final" testClassWithEnumFieldDeserialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): AssertionError (GSON 2.8.6-SNAPSHOT): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final" testCollectionOfEnumsSerialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): AssertionError (GSON 2.8.6-SNAPSHOT): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final" testTopLevelEnumSerialization(com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest): java.lang.IllegalAccessException: class com.google.gson.internal.bind.TypeAdapters$EnumTypeAdapter cannot access a member of class com.google.gson.functional.EnumTest$MyEnum with modifiers "public static final"

Enum constants are public, but the enum class itself isn't necessarily. If it isn't, then you'll get IllegalAccessException without the field.setAccessible(true).

My concern here is that if there is a SecurityManager, the field.setAccessible(true) call might fail, whereas the code using classOfT.getEnumConstants() would have worked. So we'll have fixed one problem (getting enum constants in ProGuarded code) but introduced another (getting enum constants when there is a SecurityManager).

I think the code here should read something like this:

for (final Field field : classOfT.getDeclaredFields()) { if (!field.isEnumConstant()) { continue; } AccessController.doPrivileged( new PrivilegedAction<Void>() { @Override public Void run() { field.setAccessible(true); return null; } }); @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") T constant = (T) field.get(null);

Fixed at 59a8aed

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-09T21:57:07Z

This pull request would fix #924 and #1776

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-11T18:40:54Z

gson/src/main/java/com/google/gson/internal/bind/TypeAdapters.java

+            continue;
+          }
+          field.setAccessible(true);
+          T constant = (T)(field.get(null));


Please add a @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") for this variable.

Fixed at ddee26e

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-11T18:43:44Z

gson/src/test/java/com/google/gson/functional/EnumWithObfuscatedTest.java

+
+package com.google.gson.functional;
+
+import java.lang.reflect.Field;


This import is unused

Fixed at 7dbfce9

Marcono1234 · 2020-09-11T18:46:04Z

gson/testcases-proguard.conf

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+# Options from Android Gradle Plugins


Would it be possible to move this to gson/src/test/resources? I think that might be better than having it directly in the gson folder.

Fixed at a25f96b

eamonnmcmanus · 2021-08-04T00:06:21Z

gson/src/test/java/com/google/gson/functional/EnumWithObfuscatedTest.java

+
+  public void testEnumClassWithObfuscated() {
+    for (Gender enumConstant: Gender.class.getEnumConstants()) {
+        try {


Would you mind fixing the indentation on lines 48–50 so it uses the same two-space indentation as the rest of the code?

Fixed at d8c5fcf

eamonnmcmanus

Thanks for putting this change together, especially the tests! Sorry it has taken so long for us to get to it.

There are just a couple of changes that I think would make sense.

I'm going to test this change against Google's many internal uses of Gson and if it comes through clean we should be good to go.

When enum value was obfuscated by proguard, EnumTypeAdapter raise NoSuchFieldException even if apply SerializedName annotation. Because EnumTypeAdapter cannot find obfuscated enum constant field with its name.

eamonnmcmanus

Thanks for the quick update!

googlebot added the cla: yes label Mar 22, 2019

ganadist force-pushed the master branch from e9093a0 to 61f20b6 Compare March 23, 2019 15:03

ganadist changed the title ~~SerializedName annotation workaround for obfuscated enums by ProGuard~~ Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation Mar 23, 2019

ganadist force-pushed the master branch from 4c8b3f5 to fd22de3 Compare April 7, 2019 08:24

Marcono1234 reviewed Sep 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

Marcono1234 mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2020

workaround for enums corrupted by ProGuard #1147

Closed

ganadist force-pushed the master branch from fd22de3 to 299d2e6 Compare September 10, 2020 11:14

Marcono1234 reviewed Sep 11, 2020

View reviewed changes

Marcono1234 mentioned this pull request Nov 18, 2020

[Question] : is gson still maintained? #1821

Closed

eamonnmcmanus reviewed Aug 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

eamonnmcmanus requested changes Aug 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

ganadist added 9 commits August 4, 2021 12:02

Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation

68f99f2

When enum value was obfuscated by proguard, EnumTypeAdapter raise NoSuchFieldException even if apply SerializedName annotation. Because EnumTypeAdapter cannot find obfuscated enum constant field with its name.

Add testcase for obfuscated enum class

94f894c

Update proguard plugin to support Java 11 compiler

7988fbf

Fix post-obfuscate-class task to include obfuscated test classes

1406477

Move testcases-proguard.conf into gson/src/test/resources

e99a4b1

Removed unused import

92a98da

Suppress unchecked type cast warning

6ac9f7d

Remove unnecessary catch block

20720d6

Use SecurityManager to read enum fields

59a8aed

Fix indentation of EnumWithObfuscatedTest

d8c5fcf

ganadist force-pushed the master branch from eba1415 to d8c5fcf Compare August 4, 2021 03:30

eamonnmcmanus approved these changes Aug 4, 2021

View reviewed changes

eamonnmcmanus merged commit 25f47f8 into google:master Aug 4, 2021

This was referenced Aug 20, 2021

java.lang.NoSuchFieldException for kotlin enums with ProGuard (and R8 enabled) #1776

Closed

NoSuchMethodError on Android #1941

Closed

slowcar mentioned this pull request Aug 31, 2021

Proguard rules for 2.8.8? #1946

Closed

Marcono1234 mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2021

java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: UNAVAILABLE #2020

Closed

Marcono1234 mentioned this pull request Dec 25, 2021

gson.toJson 抛出 java.lang.AssertionError: java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: ONLINE #2038

Closed

4 tasks

Marcono1234 mentioned this pull request Jul 28, 2022

TypeAdapters assertion looses causing throwable #737

Closed

rob-spoor mentioned this pull request Aug 26, 2022

Android level 32 runtime errors when calling "getBasicPaymentItems" Ingenico-ePayments/connect-sdk-client-android#10

Closed

Marcono1234 added the proguard-r8 Issues relating to the use of ProGuard and/or R8, such as problems due to obfuscation label Mar 29, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation #1495

Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation #1495

ganadist commented Mar 22, 2019 •

edited

JakeWharton commented Mar 22, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 22, 2019

JakeWharton commented Mar 22, 2019 via email

ganadist commented Mar 23, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

inder123 commented Mar 24, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 25, 2019

ganadist commented Apr 7, 2019

Marcono1234 Sep 9, 2020

ganadist Sep 10, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 11, 2020

ganadist Sep 12, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 9, 2020

ganadist Sep 10, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 11, 2020

ganadist Sep 12, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 9, 2020

ganadist Sep 10, 2020

eamonnmcmanus Aug 4, 2021 •

edited

ganadist Aug 4, 2021

Marcono1234 commented Sep 9, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 11, 2020

ganadist Sep 12, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 11, 2020

ganadist Sep 12, 2020

Marcono1234 Sep 11, 2020

ganadist Sep 12, 2020

eamonnmcmanus Aug 4, 2021

ganadist Aug 4, 2021

eamonnmcmanus left a comment

eamonnmcmanus left a comment


		package com.google.gson.functional;

		import java.lang.reflect.Field;

Navigation Menu

Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation #1495

Make EnumTypeAdapter friendly with obfuscation #1495

Conversation

ganadist commented Mar 22, 2019 • edited

JakeWharton commented Mar 22, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 22, 2019

JakeWharton commented Mar 22, 2019 via email

ganadist commented Mar 23, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 23, 2019 • edited

inder123 commented Mar 24, 2019

ganadist commented Mar 25, 2019

ganadist commented Apr 7, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eamonnmcmanus Aug 4, 2021 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Marcono1234 commented Sep 9, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eamonnmcmanus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eamonnmcmanus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ganadist commented Mar 22, 2019 •

edited

ganadist commented Mar 23, 2019 •

edited

eamonnmcmanus Aug 4, 2021 •

edited