OK, I'll enter this as a JIRA for whenever somebody (including myself) has time to look at it.
Thanks, Glen dkulp wrote: > > > Honestly, I think both things should be done. We definitely > shouldn't be creating details where one doesn't exist and isn't > needed. And hasDetails should definitely not return true if there > aren't details. > > Dan > > > On Jul 26, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Glen Mazza wrote: > >> >> Team, >> >> I'm trying to get CXF to work with WSS4J for signature/encryption >> right now. >> I got the following error message back from WSS4J: >> >> <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/";> >> <soap:Body> >> <soap:Fault> >> <faultcode>soap:Client</faultcode> >> <faultstring>WSSECURITY_EX</faultstring> >> </soap:Fault> >> </soap:Body> >> </soap:Envelope> >> >> Partial error stack that produced that message: >> [INFO] Exception in thread "main" >> javax.xml.ws.soap.SOAPFaultException: >> WSSECURITY_EX >> [INFO] at >> org.apache.cxf.jaxws.JaxWsClientProxy.invoke(JaxWsClientProxy.java: >> 218) >> [INFO] at $Proxy27.doubleIt(Unknown Source) >> [INFO] at >> com.mycompany.webservice.client.WSClient.doubleIt(WSClient.java:26) >> [INFO] at >> com.mycompany.webservice.client.WSClient.main(WSClient.java:19) >> [INFO] Caused by: org.apache.cxf.binding.soap.SoapFault: WSSECURITY_EX >> [INFO] at >> org >> .apache >> .cxf >> .binding >> .soap >> .interceptor >> .Soap11FaultInInterceptor >> .handleMessage(Soap11FaultInInterceptor.java:70) >> [INFO] at >> org >> .apache >> .cxf >> .binding >> .soap >> .interceptor >> .Soap11FaultInInterceptor >> .handleMessage(Soap11FaultInInterceptor.java:35) >> [INFO] at >> org >> .apache >> .cxf >> .phase.PhaseInterceptorChain.doIntercept(PhaseInterceptorChain.java: >> 221) >> >> The error message I'm getting is not my concern right now--it is >> what CXF >> appears to be doing to it. It seems(*) that CXF is placing an empty >> Detail >> element within this SOAPFault response. This triggers the >> SOAPFault.hasDetail() method to be true, which causes users to need >> to write >> additional code to parse through the Detail's nonexistent >> DetailElements--which is annoying once it turns out there's no >> DetailEntries >> to parse. >> >> The culprit seems to be org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Fault's >> getOrCreateDetail() method, which is called by various other >> interceptors to >> create Detail objects where there are actually no DetailEntries. Can >> we >> avoid doing this? I would say either of two things should be done: >> (1) not >> to create empty Detail objects if there are no DetailEntries (either >> when >> parsing SOAP error messages coming in externally, or when a CXF web >> service >> provider is sending back an error message), or (2) redefine >> Fault.hasDetails() to mean that the SOAPFault has a Details object >> *and* has >> DetailEntries under it. Currently, the above XML SOAP response should >> return false for hasDetails(), but it's returning TRUE because of >> the empty >> Detail element being created. >> >> Another problem with artificial creation of SOAPFault Detail >> elements is >> that their absence or presence has semantic value according to the >> SOAP >> spec[2]: >> >> "The detail element is intended for carrying application specific >> error >> information related to the Body element. It MUST be present if the >> contents >> of the Body element could not be successfully processed. It MUST NOT >> be used >> to carry information about error information belonging to header >> entries. >> Detailed error information belonging to header entries MUST be carried >> within header entries. >> >> The absence of the detail element in the Fault element indicates >> that the >> fault is not related to processing of the Body element. This can be >> used to >> distinguish whether the Body element was processed or not in case of >> a fault >> situation." >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks, >> Glen >> >> (*) I'm saying "seems" because I'm relying on the XML response I see >> in >> Wireshark and the fact that hasDetails() is returning TRUE-- >> indicating a >> Details object was created. >> >> [1] http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/xml/soap/ >> SOAPFault.html >> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383507 >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Creation-of-empty-detail-elements-for-SOAPFaults-tp18667733p18667733.html >> Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > > --- > Daniel Kulp > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > > > > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Creation-of-empty-detail-elements-for-SOAPFaults-tp18667733p18702619.html Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
