英文翻译资料A.英文原文Core Java, Volume II-Advanced FeaturesWhen Java technology first appeared on the scene, the excitement was not about a well-crafted programming language but about the possibility of safely executing applets that are delivered over the Internet (see Volume I, Chapter 10 for more information about applets). Obviously, delivering executable applets is practical only when the recipients are sure that the code cant wreak havoc on their machines. For this reason, security was and is a major concern of both the designers and the users of Java technology. This means that unlike other languages and systems, where security was implemented as an afterthought or a reaction to break-ins, security mechanisms are an integral part of Java technology.Three mechanisms help ensure safety:Language design features (bounds checking on arrays, no unchecked type conversions, no pointer arithmetic, and so on).An access control mechanism that controls what the code can do (such as file access, network access, and so on).Code signing, whereby code authors can use standard cryptographic algorithms to authenticate Java code. Then, the users of the code can determine exactly who created the code and whether the code has been altered after it was signed.Below, youll see the cryptographic algorithms supplied in the java.security package, which allow for code signing and user authentication.As we said earlier, applets were what started the craze over the Java platform. In practice, people discovered that although they could write animated applets like the famous nervous text applet, applets could not do a whole lot of useful stuff in the JDK 1.0 security model. For example, because applets under JDK 1.0 were so closely supervised, they couldnt do much good on a corporate intranet, even though relatively little risk attaches to executing an applet from your companys secure intranet. It quickly became clear to Sun that for applets to become truly useful, it was important for users to be able to assign different levels of security, depending on where the applet originated. If an applet comes from a trusted supplier and it has not been tampered with, the user of that applet can then decide whether to give the applet more privileges.To give more trust to an applet, we need to know two things:Where did the applet come from?Was the code corrupted in transit?In the past 50 years, mathematicians and computer scientists have developed sophisticated algorithms for ensuring the integrity of data and for electronic signatures. The java.security package contains implementations of many of these algorithms. Fortunately, you dont need to understand the underlying mathematics to use the algorithms in the java.security package. In the next sections, we show you how message digests can detect changes in data files and how digital signatures can prove the identity of the signer.A message digest is a digital fingerprint of a block of data. For example, the so-called SHA1 (secure hash algorithm #1) condenses any data block, no matter how long, into a sequence of 160 bits (20 bytes). As with real fingerprints, one hopes that no two messages have the same SHA1 fingerprint. Of course, that cannot be truethere are only 2160 SHA1 fingerprints, so there must be some messages with the same fingerprint. But 2160 is so large that the probability of duplication occurring is negligible. How negligible? According to James Walsh in True Odds: How Risks Affect Your Everyday Life (Merritt Publishing 1996), the chance that you will die from being struck by lightning is about one in 30,000. Now, think of nine other people, for example, your nine least favorite managers or professors. The chance that you and all of them will die from lightning strikes is higher than that of a forged message having the same SHA1 fingerprint as the original. (Of course, more than ten people, none of whom you are likely to know, will die from lightning strikes. However, we are talking about the far slimmer chance that your particular choice of people will be wiped out.)A message digest has two essential properties:If one bit or several bits of the data are changed, then the message digest also changes.A forger who is in possession of a given message cannot construct a fake message that has the same message digest as the original.The second property is again a matter of probabilities, of course. Consider the following message by the billionaire father:Upon my death, my property shall be divided equally among my children; however, my son George shall receive nothing.That message has an SHA1 fingerprint of2D 8B 35 F3 BF 49 CD B1 94 04 E0 66 21 2B 5E 57 70 49 E1 7EThe distrustful father has deposited the message with one attorney and the fingerprint with another. Now, suppose George can bribe the lawyer holding the message. He wants to change the message so that Bill gets nothing. Of course, that changes the fingerprint to a