algorithm URI was invalid: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#aes128-cbc

[Brent Putman]

On 9/26/13 2:03 PM, Cantor, Scott wrote:
>
> Were that the case, though, there's no way it would work for *any* SPs. I
> can't think of any scenario  in today's IdP that could be specific to one
> SP unless some kind of interaction were possible between code that is
> looking for the RSA key in metadata.


Right, I don't see any scenario either for per-SP behavior either.  I'm
literally just trying to understand at a code level exactly what is
happening.  Without that, everything else is speculation.


>  So perhaps the error is somehow
> mis-reporting itself as being about the AES algorithm.

Maybe, that's why I was interested in the additional logging.

>
> A lot of this comes down to that issue. All the messages have alluded to
> the claim that encryption is working for some. I think that claim has to
> be examined.


I was pretty much half-way assuming that that could not be the case. 
Based on the code, I don't see any way that this can be SP-specific. 
It's too low-level.  It's not even related to metadata.  I'm (almost)
100% certain It's either Santuario or something at the JCA crypto
provider level, and none of that has anything to do with SAML or Shib.