On 2009-07-20 05:17 PDT, Nikolai wrote: > I can see what you mean about explicit vs implicit tagging and have > now modified our decoder to lookup the context of the ASN1Object to > see if the value was tagged explicitly or implicitly and rely on the > context to implicitly decode to a particular ASN1 type.
Good luck with your decoder. >> That does seem strange. We have a [2] explicitly encoding a [0] which >> is an implicit bit string with no unused bits, apparently encapsulating >> another bit string of length zero. :-/ > I have now modified our decoder to correctly recognize POPOPrivKey > encoded as thisMessage, i.e. [0]. That BitString contains "03 00". Is > it expected to be that way ? I think it is not expected to be that way. As I wrote before: >> I'd guess that the attempt to wrap the private key with the CA's public >> key failed, resulting in a zero length value being encoded. Is there any way I can reproduce what you're seeing? I would probably require me to be able to access your CA server, and perhaps also to trust your root cert for the test. -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
