> Ahhh! I must admit I had never expected that to happen.
> Could I be rude and ask why?
Well, TemplateSign.cpp signs documents using XML template document (with
signature node):
DSIGSignature * sig = prov.newSignatureFromDOM(theDOM, sigNode);
...
sig->load();
sig->setSigningKey(key);
sig->sig
every once in a while when i run my axis client (which i use in conjunction
with xmlsec)
in the context of my web app, i get the following error as the client attempts
to add the
digital signature:
> WebappClassLoader: Lifecycle error : CL stopped
> org.apache.xml.security.signature.XMLSignatureEx
Milan,
> in destructor. In my case both createBlankSignature() and load()
> functions are called.
Ahhh! I must admit I had never expected that to happen. Could I be rude
and ask why?
If that's what you are doing, then you would have seen these leaks with
1.0 as well?
Cheers,
Berin
I am working with a service that expects the soap:Body element of the request to be
deuplicated within the signature in and Object, like so:
---
[SignedInfoElements]
[RefElements]
[SigValue]
[BodyElements]
[
Erwin van der Koogh wrote:
Exactly which method call in which class/interface are you suggesting I
use?
LOL.. I shouldn't be answering these kinds of questions this late at
night.. too easy to make a mistake. I thought you were straight DOM to
manipulate the API. It never even dawned on my you
Title: Another one memory leak
Berin,
VC6 debugger reports memory leak here:
xml-security-c-1.1.0\src\dsig\dsigsignature.cpp(546)
XSECnew(mp_signedInfo, DSIGSignedInfo(mp_doc, mp_formatter, mp_env));
It seems that you have allocated memory twice for mp_signedInfo (creat
FYI.
Original Message
Subject: Re: New Incubee
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 14:06:38 +0200
From: Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
welcome!
Berin Lautenbach wrote:
The plan at the moment is to name the new
Yes, that's it. No memory leaks there any more, but few others
persists.
Best regards,
Milan
> -Original Message-
> From: Berin Lautenbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:57 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Memory leaks (debugging)
>
>
>
Hi Peter,
pacow wrote:
also, I have attached a copy of my SOAP request. i add a reference in
the signature to '#Body', do i then need to add an id='Body' attribute to
the soap:Body tag, or elsewhere?
Yes, you would need to add an attribute to the soap:Body element. Adding
SOAP-SEC:id="Body" att
The plan at the moment is to name the new product "JuiCE". A question
to the incubator group - we have researched this name on the web, and
could not find any other cryptographic software that had this name.
There are of products on sourceforge - a blog tool [4] and a frontend to
mpg123 [5] t
Milan,
Those two are fine. The first also creates a new ref, the second works
on a new reference that is created as the sig is loaded.
The only way I can see the the problem you have occuring is if these
calls are happening somewhere and a reference is being re-used. I.e.
createBlankReferenc
Milan,
This time I can't explain it.
Can you add :
m_X509List.push_back(h);
immediately after the XSECnew(...)?
That will add it to the internal list of certificates, which will also
ensure it gets deleted when the KeyInfo is deleted.
Cheers,
Berin
Milan Tomic wrote:
Berin,
Berin,
I'm not calling those functions from my code, but they are
called implicitly by XSEC 1.1 in those cases:
1. DSIGReference::createBlankReference() is called when
sig->createReference(MAKE_UNICODE_STRING(s)) is called and
2. DSIGReference::load() is called when sig->load() is called.
Title: Memory leaks (debugging)
Berin,
I'm still trying to discover source of memory leaks I'm expiriencing. Please, could you explain to me what this peace of code means:
DSIGKeyInfoX509::appendX509Certificate() {
...
... //more code here
...
X509Holder * h;
XSECnew(h, X509Ho
Hi
We're using detached signatures to provide Digital Receipts for tax returns
sent to the Inland Revenue here in the UK. You can have a look at the
"techpack" that is published to allow 3rd party developers to produce
compliant applications here:
http://www.inlandrevenue.gov.uk/ebu/sa-techpack-04
15 matches
Mail list logo