Re: [OAUTH-WG] JWS encoding Appendix A

[Antonio Sanso <[e-mail]>]

Thanks a lot Axel!!

Regards

Antonio

On Jun 5, 2013, at 3:37 PM, <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:

Antonio,
Please have a look at this
https://code.google.com/p/jsoncrypto/source/browse/trunk/testsrc/org/jsoncrypto/JcBaseTest.java#104

The \r\n is the important.

Please make sure you have this byte representation of the payload.
The following octet sequence contains the UTF-8 representation of the
   JWS Header:

   [123, 34, 116, 121, 112, 34, 58, 34, 74, 87, 84, 34, 44, 13, 10, 32,
   34, 97, 108, 103, 34, 58, 34, 72, 83, 50, 53, 54, 34, 125]


Best regards
Axel

From: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Antonio Sanso
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 3:27 PM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> WG
Subject: [OAUTH-WG] JWS encoding Appendix A

Hi *,

while testing my encoding routine against JWS I spot a difference between my encoding and the one in the spec.

More specifically I am referring to Appendix A.1.1 [0] of the JWS spec.
Now it could easily be that the library I wrote is wrong but it works fine with the encoding in the JWT spec for example.
If somebody would like to give a look just for the record the encoding for the header in the spec looks like \


eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLA0KICJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9

while for me would look like

eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9

Same for the payload, spec

eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLA0KICJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsDQogImh0dHA6Ly9leGFtcGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ

my library

eyJpc3MiOiJqb2UiLCJleHAiOjEzMDA4MTkzODAsImh0dHA6Ly9leGFtcGxlLmNvbS9pc19yb290Ijp0cnVlfQ

Now the difference is probably given from the fact I did not take care in consideration carriage return in my input.
I am on a huge JSON expert but what is the correct way to handle it?

Regards

Antonio



[0] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jose-json-web-signature-11#appendix-A.1