cade | Config ADmin Extender

Looks about right. The only material difference between PAdES-B-LT and PAdES-B-LTA is that the signature validation data needs to be timestamped as well. As such, to go from PAdES-B-LT to PAdES-B-LTA, it suffices to add a document timestamp.

With iText, that more or less works like this:

As you have declared, you have your own code for preparing a PDF for signing and for injecting the signature container into it. Thus, your question essentially burns down to

How to create a CAdES signature container with BouncyCastle that can be used to create a PAdES BASELINE B or T PDF signature?

As I do not have your existing code, I had to use a different framework for my tests. I used the iText 7 signing framework for that.

BouncyCastle does contain a CMSSignedDataGenerator to generate CMS signature containers.

The default implementation of the SignerInfo generation therein unfortunately is not CAdES/PAdES compatible as it does not create signed ESSCertID[v2] attributes. Fortunately, though, the implementation is designed to allow plugging in custom attributes sets.

Thus, you can create the CAdES containers required for PAdES BASELINE signatures with a customized CMSSignedDataGenerator.

So when you have prepared the PDF for signing, you can proceed like this:

The problem with your solution is that after check and count are modified at the end of the loop, they are re-declared to 1 and 10 respectively at the beginning of the loop at every passage.
You need to move the declaration just before the while loop.
Also div doesn't need to be a float given that the decimal part of this number is irrelevant.
You could also use less variables by replacing check by 10 and using num directly instead of temporarily storing results in div.

I think this might be a simpler solution

square peg, round hole

You cannot use async iterables for this problem. It is the nature of for await .. of to run in series. await blocks and the loop will not continue until the awaited promise has resovled. You need a more precise level of control where you can enforce these specific requirements.

To start, we have a mock myJob that simulates a long computation. More than likely this will be a network request to some API in your app -

With everyone's help, I found the solution. I edited the publishing information and there was a red dot by Target Framework net6.0. I clicked the drop-down and one of the options was "net6.0-windows". I selected that and it published correctly.

The data is inside the page in the form of HTML comment (). To parse it, you can use next example:

And do you understand why? You're not adding to a list. Every time through the list, you destroy the previous player_stats and create a new one with this row. You need to add player_stats = [] before the loop, and use

There are some issues in the signature container embedded in your PDF.

Your PDF is version 1.5 and the signature uses the subfilter ETSI.CAdES.detached. Thus, the embedded signature container should be conform to ETSI EN 319 142-1 (PAdES building blocks) which also refers to ETSI EN 319 122-1 (CAdES building blocks). But there are deviations:

First of all the CMSVersion shall be set to either 1 or 3 (CAdES 4.4). But in your case it is set to 5.

Then SignedData.crls contains entries, in particular one with type other. This field in case of PAdES should not be used anyways, in particular not with such entries. Actually this entry is the reason for the invalid CMSVersion mentioned above: If SignedData.crls contains an entry with a type of other, RFC 5652 requires version 5.

The SignerInfo of your signature container contains a signingTime signed attribute. This is explicitly forbidden for PAdES BASELINE signatures (PAdES 6.3).

It also contains a cmsAlgorithmProtection signed attribute. While not explicitly forbidden, this attribute is not on the list of attributes that may be used in PAdES (PAdES 5.2).

Also there is at least one issue in the embedded certificates: One of them has a long list of extended key usages, timeStamping being one of them. But that extended key usage may only be used alone.

This is where I stopped looking for further issues, so the list might be incomplete. You probably should start by using less complex signature containers and (when that works) try to add extra features one by one to check whether they mean trouble with Adobe Reader.

By the way, such an issue might actually be due to Adobe Reader not supported some algorithm used in your signature; the list of crypto algorithms supported by Adobe Reader is very short, a number of algorithms allowed in the EU for qualified signatures are not supported.

I think you need remove only missing values columns with DataFrame.dropna: