Hi Jamie,

Please see my comments inline.


On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 09:48 +0100, Jamie Lyon wrote:
> Excellent, that's fixed that problem.
> 
> You will have to excuse my simple questions; I've not used ws-policy
> before.
> 
> Is it possible to specify that the client has to include a timestamp in
> the sent message, but may or may not receive one back?
In the current implementation it is not possible. Because
<sp:Includetimestamp> assertion is common for both sending and recieving
messages.

> 
> Having <sp:IncludeTimestamp/> returns "[info] [rampart][shp] Timestamp
> is not in the message", and modifying it to <sp:IncludeTimestamp
> wsp:Optional="true"/> still comes up with the same error.

In our current Security policy implementation we are not supporting
wsp:Optional scenarios yet. Considerable amount of work need to be done
to support this. 

Is this a frequent scenario?  We haven't encountered this when we are
interoping with other implementations. If it is a common scenario then
we can give a fix just for <sp:IncludeTimestamp> case.


Thanks.
Manjula.


> 
> Thanks,
> Jamie
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Manjula Peiris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: 08 August 2007 11:22
> > To: Apache AXIS C Developers List
> > Subject: Re: Error: "Key Reference Info is mismatch with policy"?
> > 
> > Hi Jamie,
> > 
> > Please check the value of <sp:IncludeToken> attribute in the
> > <sp:InitiatorToken> element. If it is ,
> >
> http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/07/securitypolicy/IncludeToken/Always
> To
> > Recipient then the certificate used to signed the message is sent only
> by
> > the client to server. The Client should not see it  attached as a
> > <BinarySecurityToken> in the recieved message. If you want this
> > <BinarySecurityToken> element to be in the recieved message of the
> client
> > please change the <sp:IncludeToken>  attribute to
> >
> http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/07/securitypolicy/IncludeToken/Always
> .
> > 
> > If this does not work please send the policy file you are using.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > -Manjula.
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 16:26 +0100, Jamie Lyon wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm writing a client to an existing service in Axis2/C. Can anyone
> > > shed any light as to what could cause the above error message "Key
> > > Reference Info is mismatch with policy"? It appears to me as though
> > > it's saying that the namespace or something in the received message
> is
> > > not matching what is in the policy.xml. You can see the context of
> the
> > > message in the snippet of the debug log below.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The situation seems odd however, since as you can see from the sent
> log,
> > the message sent by the client is perfectly fine. The namespaces,
> tokens
> > etc... all seem to match that which is received back from the server.
> > >
> > > I have attached the sent and received messages, and below is a
> snippet
> > of the debug log:
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][shp] Process security
> > header
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Security for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > BinarySecurityToken for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Signature for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > SignedInfo for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > CanonicalizationMethod for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > SignatureMethod for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Reference for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Transforms for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Transform for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > DigestMethod for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > DigestValue for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > SignatureValue for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > KeyInfo for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > SecurityTokenReference for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Reference for EncryptedKey
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Security for Signature
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > BinarySecurityToken for Signature
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][axiom] Checking node
> > Signature for Signature
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][shp] Processing
> Signature
> > element.
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [Rampart][shp]Key Reference Info
> is
> > mismatch with policy
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [info]  [rampart][rampart_in_handler]
> > Security Header processing failed.
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [debug] engine.c(292) Axis2 engine
> receive
> > completed!
> > > [Tue Aug  7 16:13:02 2007] [error]
> autogen/axis2_DataService.cpp(1236)
> > returnNode is NULL: Error code: 2 :: NULL paramater was passed when a
> non
> > NULL parameter was expected
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jamie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to