Hi,
My patch don't handle well this test case. It seems that it take on
account that the signed info is going to be c14n, reparsed & reimported.
But this is not alway the case. The SignedInfo is not c14n and
reimported if the c14n method is "safe". As stated in the second
paragraph of this mail
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2001OctDec/0054.html.
And also in the REC
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmldsig-core/#sec-CanonicalizationMethod-NOTE, it
saids clearly that the above behavior is not always but only for
arbitrary c14n methods.
What do you think is the good behavior? For me it is weird to have a
test case that relays in this kind of unstandard behavior. And the parse
and imports is a very wasteful process that need to be only done with
insecure c14n. But if you think that the test is correct I can correct
my patch and send it back again.
Regards
- Re: test_sixteen_external_dsa in,org.apache.xml.security... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: test_sixteen_external_dsa in,org.apache.xml.sec... Davanum Srinivas
- Re: test_sixteen_external_dsa in,org.apache.xml... Davanum Srinivas
- Re: test_sixteen_external_dsa in,org.apache... Berin Lautenbach
- Re: test_sixteen_external_dsa in,org.apache.xml.sec... [EMAIL PROTECTED]