- 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
>> 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 UTC