Hi Thomas, maybe my feedback was not clear - it’s clear that this is in the spec. But in the PDFBox sources I couldn’t find this limitation.
BR Maruan Sahyoun Am 25.03.2014 um 12:32 schrieb Thomas Chojecki <[email protected]>: > Hi Maruan, > I also take a closer look and find the following part in the PDF32000_2008 > Spec > > 12.8.1 -> Table 252 on page 467 > Type name (Optional) The type of PDF object that this dictionary > describes; if present, shall be Sig for a signature dictionary. > > @ Nicolas > I think this need to be fixed in future versions. Can you please create a > JIRA Issue [1]? > > Best regards > Thomas > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PDFBOX > > > Am 2014-03-25 12:13, schrieb Maruan Sahyoun: >> Hi, >> I did a very quick scan of the sources and couldn’t find this >> limitation - I might be wrong though. Could you let us know how you >> came to that conclusion e.g. where in the sources did you find that? >> Which version of PDFBox are you referring to? Would you have a sample >> PDF to validate that? >> BR >> Maruan Sahyoun >> Am 25.03.2014 um 11:48 schrieb Nicolas Kaczmarski >> <[email protected]>: >>> Hello, >>> We have a signed PDF but signature is described without key "Sig". >>> As you can see in the standard PDF 32000-1:2008 - Table 252 - Entries in a >>> signature dictionary, this key is optional : >>> "(Optional) The type of PDF object that this dictionary describes; if >>> present, shall be Sig for a signature dictionary. " >>> But PDFBox seems to limit its research of signature only if this key "Sig" >>> is present. >>> What is your position about that? >>> Regards, >>> Nicolas.
