Description
From Kevin J. in the user mailing list:
We are currently using Apache Solr / Tika to index documents for searching. The exact version that is being used is version 1.8.8 of PDFBox.
We can across a document that produced this stack trace (trimmed to the relevant part of PDFBox):
Caused by: java.lang.StringIndexOutOfBoundsException: String index out of range: 1 at java.lang.String.charAt(String.java:658) at org.apache.pdfbox.util.DateConverter.parseDate(DateConverter.java:679) at org.apache.pdfbox.util.DateConverter.toCalendar(DateConverter.java:808) at org.apache.pdfbox.util.DateConverter.toCalendar(DateConverter.java:780) at org.apache.pdfbox.util.DateConverter.toCalendar(DateConverter.java:753) at org.apache.pdfbox.cos.COSDictionary.getDate(COSDictionary.java:849) at org.apache.pdfbox.pdmodel.PDDocumentInformation.getCreationDate(PDDocumentInformation.java:212)
Inspection of the document's binary revealed that it contained a creationDate consisting of a single white space (ASCII 0x20), which is probably illegal. I managed to create a small reproduction of the error using like so:
File file = new File("/path/to/document/bad.pdf"); InputStream stream = new FileInputStream(file); PDFParser parser = new PDFParser(stream); parser.parse(); PDDocumentInformation info = parser.getPDDocument().getDocumentInformation(); Calendar creationDate = info.getCreationDate(); System.out.println(creationDate.toString());
Which produces the same stack trace. I verified this against the latest build from the site on 1.8.9, and the behavior remains. This looks very similar to PDFBOX-1803, however that issue is marked as resolved in 1.8.5. So, my questions:
- Is the exception an expected behavior? Ideally Tika would just index the document anyway, the creation date isn't important to us. Tika had an issue for this,
TIKA-1233, that marks it as fixed by swallowing the exception, but looking at the comments for it, they removed the try/catch in r1593983 since it is marked as fixed here. - Is this a regression, or slightly different somehow from 1803? Shall I create a new issue or get the existing 1803 re-opened?
- The PDF that reproduces the issue can be downloaded here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tll5rscrlt95xuc/bad.pdf?dl=0