Reflection violates the accessibility

hi, experts,

Recently, i am studying reflection in java.lang.reflect.*

i found out that Field and Method class has the method called setAccessible(boolean flag), once set it to true, you can access other classes private field or method... isn't that violates the accessibility in Java and the encapsulation concept? --provided by JDK1.3 or later version..

Who is Participating?
Igor BazarnyConnect With a Mentor Commented:

If you would use getDeclaredField instead of getField(), your code wouldn't throw exception.

A bit of Class.getField() documentation:
The field to be reflected is determined by the algorithm that follows. Let C be the class represented by this object:

1. If C declares a _public_ field with the name specified, that is the field to be reflected.
2. If no field was found in step 1 above, this algorithm is applied recursively to each direct superinterface of C. The direct superinterfaces are searched in the order they were declared.
3. If no field was found in steps 1 and 2 above, and C has a superclass S, then this algorithm is invoked recursively upon S. If C has no superclass, then a NoSuchFieldException is thrown.

In contrast,
public Field[] getDeclaredFields()
                          throws SecurityException
Returns an array of Field objects reflecting all the fields declared by the class or interface represented by this Class object. This includes public, protected, default (package) access, and private fields, but excludes inherited fields.

Unfortunately, there are no such details in getDeclaredField() doc, but experience shows that it returns private field when requested.

Yes, this is violation of encapsulation. On another hand, there are could be condition where such break of encapsulation is useful. In my opinion, setAccessible() method is intended for tool use. E.g. some persistance management library could use setAccessible() to acceess attributes to be stored into database.

Igor Bazarny,
Brainbench MVP for Java 1,
saxabooConnect With a Mentor Commented:

according to Sun's javadoc :

'First, if there is a security manager, its checkPermission method is called with a ReflectPermission("suppressAccessChecks") permission.'

So when you setAccessible(true) (i.e. you want to disable access checks on the object), Java first verifies tht you have the right to do so.

To me, there is no security violation, at least that's what I understand from the doc.

Hope this helps,


I created a class Test with a private field:
public class Test {
  private String test;

And executed this code:
try {
  Class cls = Test.class;
  java.lang.reflect.Field fld = cls.getField("test");
} catch (Exception e) {
The result was:
java.lang.NoSuchFieldException: test
     at java.lang.Class.getField0(Native Method)
     at java.lang.Class.getField(
     at Demo.main(

As you can see - you can't get an instance of this private field, which is needed to get the change the accessibility.
Thus only the code, that can access this field can change the accesibility of the field. I don't think that this violates "the accessibility in Java and the encapsulation concept", becasue if a code fragment can access the field (method) - it could make the value (functionallity) available to the other code, that cannot access it.
Get your problem seen by more experts

Be seen. Boost your question’s priority for more expert views and faster solutions

rayhon88Author Commented:
u should use getDeclaredField instead of getField
rayhon88Author Commented:
great answer bazamy..but the answer from saxaboo is helpful too..
question is how to set up the security check? give me some guideline on this saxaboo...


Igor BazarnyCommented:

Check out this document:

For applet related permission should not be granted, and I don't think that ensuring proper encapsulation using security permissions is worth spent efforts. As my experience shows, not many developers know about this way of member access, and those who know typically understand consequences.

BTW, in stand-alone application mentioned permission granted to everyone (hmm, I need to refresh this, it could be that in standalone mode there is no security manager at all, so all permissions are granted to everyone)

Igor Bazarny
rayhon88Author Commented:
All i worry is that if hacker knows the class contract like Customer class, can he see the private information for the Customer with this mechanism? Normally, if RMI that may pass the serialized objects for remote usage, will it possibly be stolen by the hacker during the network transportation?

No comment has been added lately, so it's time to clean up this TA.

I will leave a recommendation in the Cleanup topic area that this question is:

- points to bazarny@idg

Please leave any comments here within the
next seven days.


Cleanup Volunteer
 I actually recommended points only to bazarny :-)
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.