W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec@w3.org > February 2010

Re: ACTION-510 Propose explanation of use of content vs. element in implementations

From: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:06:58 +0100
Cc: Thomas Roessler <tlr@w3.org>, "public-xmlsec@w3.org Public List" <public-xmlsec@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8939C6B2-9AD9-46A6-BE41-949799A1FC09@w3.org>
To: Pratik Datta <pratik.datta@oracle.com>
On 9 Feb 2010, at 19:55, Pratik Datta wrote:

> I checked one of our implementations. In this one the decryptor doesn’t really need the “content” vs “element”.  Here is what the decryptor does :

Thanks.

>  
> It decrypts the cipher text, to get the plaintext, and then puts the plain text inside dummy start and end tags. I.e. like this  “<dummy> plaintext </dummy>” and then parses this xml document  into a DOM tree. For type = “element” it checks that the <dummy> element has only one child, whereas for type = “content” it doesn’t perform this check. In either case it just takes all the children of the <dummy> node and deep imports them into the original document, replacing the <EncryptedData> element. It also does special handling for  namespaces and xml attributes that I have omitted for simplicity

I suppose the special handling for namespaces and attributes is independent of whether it's "element" or "content"?

>  I am still checking with the other implementations.

Any news from that?
Received on Friday, 12 February 2010 17:07:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 12 February 2010 17:07:02 GMT