fwiw, when i run your test using a base-64 implemention that i use, i get
the same result as you get with the commons Base64.  that is:

    NWoZK3kTsExUV00Ywo1G5jlUKKs=

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 7:21 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: turbine-dev
> Subject: Base64 from commons-util
> 
> 
> In BaseSecurityService.encryptPassword(), it first encrypts a 
> password using
> the scheme it is told to use (in my case SHA), it then calls the
> commons.Base64 class to encode the results from the SHA encoding.
> 
> Previously, we were using another Base64 class in 
> Turbine...I'm not sure
> which one...
> 
> The old result of SHA+Old Turbine Base64 returned this string 
> for the sha
> encode/base64 of the String "1"...
> 
>     NWoZK3kTsExUV00Ywo1G5jlU
> 
> Now, with the commons Base64, I get this:
> 
>     NWoZK3kTsExUV00Ywo1G5jlUKKs=
> 
> As you can see, it has a few characters tacked onto the end of it.
> 
> So, is the bug in the old Base64 implementation or in the 
> Common's base64
> implementation?
> 
> -jon
> 
> P.s. Here is a little test program...
> 
> import java.io.*;
> import java.lang.*;
> import java.util.*;
> 
> import java.security.MessageDigest;
> 
> import org.apache.commons.util.Base64;
> 
> public class Test
> {
>     public static void main(String args[])
>     {
>         try
>         {
>             String password = "1";
>             
>             MessageDigest md = MessageDigest.getInstance("SHA");
>             // We need to use unicode here, to be independent 
> of platform's
>             // default encoding. Thanks to SGawin for spotting this.
>             byte[] digest = md.digest(password.getBytes("UTF-8"));
>     
>             // Base64-encode the digest.
>             byte[] encodedDigest = Base64.encode(digest);
>             System.out.println (encodedDigest == null ? null :
>                     new String(encodedDigest));
>         }
>         catch (Exception e)
>         {
>         }
>     }
> }
> 

Reply via email to