The one open point is different handling of this case
in ASN.1 standards. So if that's an older protocol
using ASN.1 standard 208,209 , the adding and removing
of zeros (trailing bits) is not allowed. So for the
decoder (in this case) would means invalid value and
decoding error when the
This is a really tricky one! Specifications in earlier versions of
ASN.1 were often imprecise in tnis area (I might even say downright
ambiguous!). But I do not think they were actually erroneous.
It was always (I think) the case that DER required the omission of all
trailing zero bits when
Something about this point is also mentioned in the
book ASN.1 communication between Heterogeneous
Systems by Mr Dubuisson.
BitStringValue(when IdentifierList is used):
...
Designers should then make sure that the presence or
absence of trailing zerors remains meaningless for the
application(no
Here I will disagree with Olivier. It is not so much that the rule has
been changing, but that the way of expressing it in text has been
changing. As I said earlier, I do not believe that there is text in
earlier versions that cannot be interpretted in line with the current
text. It is just
