W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-encryption@w3.org > March 2002

Re: More inter samples

From: Takeshi Imamura <IMAMU@jp.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:01:50 +0900
To: Jiandong Guo <jguo@phaos.com>, Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
Cc: xml-encryption@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF15265AC3.C04B7AAC-ON49256B79.003DCBE0@LocalDomain>


>> Attached is a revised version of the samples sent before. I mainly
>> update the Diffie-Hellman examples to accommodate the newest changes in
>> the specification.

I confirmed that our implementation succeeded in decrypting most of your
examples except ones using DH and RSA-OAEP with SHA256 and SHA512.  I also
confirmed that it failed to decrypt your bad-algorithm example because of
wrong key length.  However, I found that it succeeded in decrypting your
bad-type example.  That is reasonable to me because the decryptor is not
required to perform validation on the serialized XML and hence our
implementation does not.  Should we include this example in test vectors?

>Thank you! I've linked this from [1]. Would you mind sending a report
then?
>(Yes and No down the column)? For most of the application and processing
>features, there's no interop, but self-reporting. But we could do interop
>on bits of the spec other than the crypto:
>
>1. We could interop testing on the encoding requirements. (Have a document
>in an exotic encoding with an encrypted element which is obviously in
>UTF-8).
>2. The Decryption Transform.
>
>And of course, I want to make sure performance is acceptable, but I don't
>have a metric. What scenarios are folks looking at, 3 encryptions in a
1Meg
>files?
>
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2002/02-xenc-interop.html

Thanks,
Takeshi IMAMURA
Tokyo Research Laboratory
IBM Research
imamu@jp.ibm.com
Received on Monday, 11 March 2002 08:40:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:42:20 GMT