Hi,

I used version 1.1 and I signed documents that has external URI references
using JUNIT tests. Applying the same test with version 1.2, my JUNIT tests
failed. I compare the signature and digest value and they are DIFFERENT
!!!!!

****************************************************************************
**
Here is the signature result of my XML document with version 1.1:
****************************************************************************
**

<edoc:SignatureBlock
id="Revision-1-Signature-1"><edoc:SignatureDate>2004-12-16T15:19:57</edoc:Si
gnatureDate><edoc:Signer>Hess Yvan (first signature)</edoc:Signer>
<ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";>
<ds:SignedInfo>
<ds:CanonicalizationMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315";></ds:Canonicaliz
ationMethod>
<ds:SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1";></ds:SignatureMethod>
<ds:Reference URI="">
<ds:Transforms>
<ds:Transform Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xmldsig-filter2";>
<dsig-xpath:XPath
xmlns:dsig-xpath="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xmldsig-filter2";
Filter="intersect">/edoc:EDOC/edoc:Object</dsig-xpath:XPath>
</ds:Transform>
</ds:Transforms>
<ds:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></ds:DigestMethod>
<ds:DigestValue>iR+QqWJUmEp9SqD/y7EWwF2Svqg=</ds:DigestValue>
</ds:Reference>
<ds:Reference URI="urn:hypersuite:8F1F8E64-C0A8024E0160C4B0-A0033464">
<ds:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></ds:DigestMethod>
<ds:DigestValue>7typFfsZFzJVtEsGinu58N8RtqE=</ds:DigestValue>
</ds:Reference>
</ds:SignedInfo>
<ds:SignatureValue>
RwNgZQIe2haQQufbN8N/MeSsLKZOLkDczPai9H2j4GUvc4MYyh5DHzumAUN6TY9xQGp+oisOlPJJ
bLbe33kK0i637v1r737RYg+axX3zuc6N89hjgqpSlGWET23JfzYpCw+ZnhLtDjbD/8pqVB7+NC0P
G7C8E43ZklpxeAZsHI0cuYXwWCOo0GFKyAxhpuvhyjSc2NX9UBy9N5IL/l6rHTH7T3PXv1+nuKXV
gkXEG587IWCcxjRLM/rBzdCr3WE1gslpWOr/9LOOhXzm6JkswS+QaBaawThuZi8KryTfeM4YTHvO
urniH1fN3pH5aNpgGLu/PB6zusv7jjXEJBzHmQ==
</ds:SignatureValue>
......

****************************************************************************
**
Here is the signature result of my XML document with version 1.2
****************************************************************************
**

<edoc:SignatureBlock
id="Revision-1-Signature-1"><edoc:SignatureDate>2004-12-10T15:04:55</edoc:Si
gnatureDate><edoc:Signer>Hess Yvan (first signature)</edoc:Signer>
<ds:Signature xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#";>
<ds:SignedInfo>
<ds:CanonicalizationMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xml-c14n-20010315";></ds:Canonicaliz
ationMethod>
<ds:SignatureMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#rsa-sha1";></ds:SignatureMethod>
<ds:Reference URI="">
<ds:Transforms>
<ds:Transform Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xmldsig-filter2";>
<dsig-xpath:XPath
xmlns:dsig-xpath="http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xmldsig-filter2";
Filter="intersect">/edoc:EDOC/edoc:Object</dsig-xpath:XPath>
</ds:Transform>
</ds:Transforms>
<ds:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></ds:DigestMethod>
<ds:DigestValue>VUXqX81Q/RLCegjQdaBOISDDayE=</ds:DigestValue>
</ds:Reference>
<ds:Reference URI="urn:hypersuite:8F1F8E64-C0A8024E0160C4B0-A0033464">
<ds:DigestMethod
Algorithm="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#sha1";></ds:DigestMethod>
<ds:DigestValue>7typFfsZFzJVtEsGinu58N8RtqE=</ds:DigestValue>
</ds:Reference>
</ds:SignedInfo>
<ds:SignatureValue>
rnvby10ZnBnqZcR6qQk48SmagIRdF9dBZ0RAvR/eSq44G12nZbxWJHDGPfZE3d7msCZKKsbXqqGl
6QnoqOJUf+mMjoBcytsfXUBfznGu20T63JbXEGhaGW/XqBvbyATiSnR3NFf/KzrxV73KKQAWHOv/
SZDMln17J//mRvjEa+78JEdaKRRS4C1JCtktm88FJrpeeIsNJoZ1Swm0Lcn/9/aX1L85Xrs7NDKz
0eCt/bfaFStY9ILYLzzKVrrQmyeU8nJA8a3ky1ZFBMYXB8n4DsYb6f+JJTvJjtBtgZw7doV/hzc+
PTK6pVUCD90t7Gv7vSq+eI7NQte3WC3RK/yfBA==
</ds:SignatureValue>
.......

As you can see DigestValue and SignatureValue are different with  version
1.1 and 1.2 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is the problem ? In which version can I
rely ?

Can anybody help me. It is a critical point for us because we archive signed
xml document on optical disk and if they are wrong signed....


Regards. Yvan Hess

Reply via email to