Hi Nandana,
thank you very much for the reply. There was only one tiny difference in my
code. The difference is the one between the patch for JIRA 104 and the
change in JIRA 105 - one additional, but very important parentheses in line:
if( sigParts.size() > 0 &&
// (rmd.isInitiator() && rpd.getInitiatorToken() != null) ||
// (!rmd.isInitiator() && rpd.getRecipientToken() != null)) {
*(* (rmd.isInitiator() && rpd.getInitiatorToken() != null)
||
(!rmd.isInitiator() && rpd.getRecipientToken() != null) *) *)
{
// Do signature
this.doSignature(rmd);
}
:-)
Anyway, is it true that a given patch is applied into the trunk when the
corresponding JIRA has *Resolution:* Fixed? Or some additional conditions
should be met?
Regards,
Dobri
On Dec 5, 2007 6:34 AM, Nandana Mihindukulasooriya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
> I checked this policy with the trunk and it works fine. In fact, we have
> an integration test
> to test this scenario. See the patch for issue [1] .
>
> The first problem was that in <xenc:EncryptedKey> there was missing the
> > <xenc:ReferenceList> node. The problem that I found (and available into
> > the
> > Rampart trunk, too) was that into the AsymmetricBindingBuilder's
> > doSignBeforeEncrypt(RampartMessageData) method there was the following
> > code:
>
>
> Yes, this true. Patch for issue [1] also solve this issue.
>
> Anyway, now I am receiving the "Cannot find Reference in Manifest"
> > Exception. I should test this with trunk version to be sure if this is
> > fixed, but it is a little bit more complicated, so if someone has the
> same
> > problem solved/observed with trunk version he is welcomed to share his
> > knowledge.
> > Please note that this is related to
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAMPART-110.
>
>
> Yep, this is also fixed in patch for issue [1]. By the way, this patch is
> not yet applied.
> So you can patch it to the trunk for the moment.
>
> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAMPART-105.
>
> Regards,
> Nandana
>
>
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dobri
> >
>
