(In reply to Albert Astals Cid from comment #102) > So we're stuck on "need to use the offset" part, right? > > Could someone try to do make the code use it even if we don't have any pdf > that needs it?
I am not sure if it is good to apply the robustness principle on security functions. In those cases it might be better to be defensive and reject signatures not following the recommendation. In this case if the ByteRange does not cover the whole document there could be parts of the document that can be modified without invalidating the signature. Would it then be good to tell the user that the signature has been validated and the document is not modified even though in fact there are parts of the document for which we don't know? -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/740506 Title: verify digital signatures To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/evince/+bug/740506/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
