Exclusive canonicalization problem

I have a problem with the exclusive canonicalizer without comments class in

the xml security 1.2 source code.

I have the following document :

<roap:riHello xmlns:roap="urn:oma:bac:dldrm:roap-1.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" sessionId="292241414" status="Success">

<riID>

<hash>sk+4JImZCG+IV4/c+Pw9FeAbhuc=</hash>

</keyIdentifier>

</riID>

</extensions>

</roap:riHello>

If I canonicalize the previous document using the exclusive without comment algo

the document I get is the following:

<roap:riHello xmlns:roap="urn:oma:bac:dldrm:roap-1.0" sessionId="1144777697" status="Success">

<riID>

<hash>sk+4JImZCG+IV4/c+Pw9FeAbhuc=</hash>

</keyIdentifier>

</riID>

</extensions>

</roap:riHello>

As you can see the xmlns:xsi is removed from the roap:riHello element,

but not added to the keyIdentifier and the extension element.

So If I input the result document in a DOM parser it just said not bound

exception "xsi is not bound".

Well at this point I try to understood the problem and I check the source code of xml sec 1.2.

I found something very strange:

In the parsing of the doc in the canonicalizerSubTree method there is a call to the method

handlesAttributes that handles the attributes of the current node of the doc parsing.

In debugging the method I found that when the parser comes to <keyIdentifier xsi:type="roap:X509SPKIHash">

for instance then the Attr object in the handlesAttributes method is of class AttrImpl and not AttrNSImpl

so the call to the Attr.getPrefix() always return null if Attr is instance of AttrImpl ! Whereas there is actually a prefix that is xsi !!!!

So the attribute namespace is not seen as visiblyUtilized !!!

Do you know why I have a AttrImpl object instance instead of a AttrNSImp that should

handle the namespace prefix correctly?

Do you think it is a bug in the dom parser or in the xml sec source code or is it something I don't understand

or something wrong with my document ?

Thank you in advance for any answers.

Cédric

Reply via email to