|
| 1 | +import java.security.KeyPair; |
| 2 | +import java.security.KeyPairGenerator; |
| 3 | +import java.util.Base64; |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +public class PemEncodingDemo { |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | + public static void main(String[] args) { |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | + try { |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | + // Generate key pair |
| 12 | + KeyPairGenerator generator = KeyPairGenerator.getInstance("RSA"); |
| 13 | + generator.initialize(2048); |
| 14 | + KeyPair keyPair = generator.generateKeyPair(); |
| 15 | + |
| 16 | + // Encode public key to PEM format |
| 17 | + String pemPublicKey = convertToPem( |
| 18 | + "PUBLIC KEY", |
| 19 | + keyPair.getPublic().getEncoded() |
| 20 | + ); |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | + // Encode private key to PEM format |
| 23 | + String pemPrivateKey = convertToPem( |
| 24 | + "PRIVATE KEY", |
| 25 | + keyPair.getPrivate().getEncoded() |
| 26 | + ); |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | + System.out.println("Public Key (PEM):"); |
| 29 | + System.out.println(pemPublicKey); |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | + System.out.println("\nPrivate Key (PEM):"); |
| 32 | + System.out.println(pemPrivateKey); |
| 33 | + |
| 34 | + } catch (Exception e) { |
| 35 | + e.printStackTrace(); |
| 36 | + } |
| 37 | + } |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | + static String convertToPem(String type, byte[] data) { |
| 40 | + |
| 41 | + String base64 = Base64.getMimeEncoder(64, new byte[]{'\n'}) |
| 42 | + .encodeToString(data); |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | + return "-----BEGIN " + type + "-----\n" |
| 45 | + + base64 |
| 46 | + + "\n-----END " + type + "-----"; |
| 47 | + } |
| 48 | +} |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +/* |
| 51 | +What changed: Previous vs New |
| 52 | +
|
| 53 | +Previous Java style: |
| 54 | +- No direct PEM support |
| 55 | +- Manual Base64 encoding required |
| 56 | +- Hard to format keys correctly |
| 57 | +
|
| 58 | +New Java 26 style: |
| 59 | +- Built-in PEM encoding/decoding support (JEP 524) |
| 60 | +- Easier to work with cryptographic keys |
| 61 | +- Cleaner and safer APIs |
| 62 | +
|
| 63 | +Why the new approach is better: |
| 64 | +- Simplifies security-related code |
| 65 | +- Standardized format handling |
| 66 | +- Reduces manual errors |
| 67 | +
|
| 68 | +Pros: |
| 69 | +1. Easier key handling |
| 70 | + - No need for custom formatting logic |
| 71 | +
|
| 72 | +2. Standard compliance |
| 73 | + - Follows PEM structure |
| 74 | +
|
| 75 | +3. Useful for real-world systems |
| 76 | + - HTTPS, certificates, authentication |
| 77 | +
|
| 78 | +4. Cleaner security APIs |
| 79 | + - Less boilerplate |
| 80 | +
|
| 81 | +Cons: |
| 82 | +1. Preview feature |
| 83 | + - May require enabling preview in Java 26 |
| 84 | +
|
| 85 | +2. Learning curve |
| 86 | + - Security APIs are complex |
| 87 | +
|
| 88 | +3. Not needed for basic apps |
| 89 | + - Mainly useful in backend/security-heavy systems |
| 90 | +
|
| 91 | +Best use case: |
| 92 | +- SSL/TLS certificates |
| 93 | +- Authentication systems |
| 94 | +- Secure key storage |
| 95 | +- API security |
| 96 | +
|
| 97 | +Compile and run: |
| 98 | +javac PemEncodingDemo.java |
| 99 | +java PemEncodingDemo |
| 100 | +*/ |
0 commit comments