It sounds good. I will try to writte a test that stress this problem
with your suggestions,
Do you mind to fill a bugreport? or if you want i can do for you?
Regards,
On 7/26/05, Vishal Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Raul Benito wrote:
>
> >If you think so... Then I will also do it in CVS head.
> >Anyway can you send a test case?
> >
> I can write one but I do know of a scenario when it can be seen.
> If you try to verify a signature after a decryption operation has been
> performed on the same document, this problem can be observed. This is
> because, the decryption (Java version) step creates a document fragment
> out of the decrypted content and places it under the appropriate parent
> node. Next if you try to verify a signature on that parent node, you'll
> have to handle the c14n of its document fragment child.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Vishal
>
> > so i can test it and include to the
> >testsuite for the future.
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Raul
> >
> >On 7/24/05, Vishal Mahajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I observed a possible bug in the CanonicalizerBase class. If the node
> >>passed to method canonicalizeSubTree(Node, NameSpaceSymbTable) is of
> >>type DocumentFragment, currently an exception is thrown. I think the
> >>behavior in such a case should be same as that for a Document type node.
> >>Just wanted to confirm this. I have also pasted the patch below (Note
> >>that the patch is against the 1.2.1 version of the code).
> >>
> >>Vishal
> >>
> >>--------------------------------------------------------
> >>--- CanonicalizerBase.java.orig Mon Feb 28 21:55:58 2005
> >>+++ CanonicalizerBase.java Sun Jul 24 23:15:33 2005
> >>@@ -165,10 +165,10 @@
> >>
> >> case Node.ENTITY_NODE :
> >> case Node.NOTATION_NODE :
> >>- case Node.DOCUMENT_FRAGMENT_NODE :
> >> case Node.ATTRIBUTE_NODE :
> >> // illegal node type during traversal
> >> throw new CanonicalizationException("empty");
> >>+ case Node.DOCUMENT_FRAGMENT_NODE :
> >> case Node.DOCUMENT_NODE :
> >> for (Node currentChild = currentNode.getFirstChild();
> >> currentChild != null;
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
http://r-bg.com
