[DCP-o-matic] DCP rejected by QC

Hi Carl and all. I've just had a DCP rejected at QC by Motion Picture Solutions. The film is being distributed by a major studio (though it's a one-day release, so not as big a deal as that sounds, it's really not big budget). Foolish of me to get involved - I knew they'd run the DCP through a QC process which was going to be incredibly tight, and I did fear a fail based on something nitpicky. And so it is. Damn me for just trying to help out! There's a wider issue about how it might advantage market leaders to ensure that DCPs created with "unprofessional" tools like DCP-o-matic are branded as "faulty". But that's a rant for another day! Anyway, below are the details I've been given so far. Of course, if any chance of a swift fix, that'd be great. But more importantly I hope this may be an opportunity to harden DCP-o-matic and get it one step closer to being viewed on the same level as the big boys. Here's the info: DCP made using DCP-o-matic 2.10.5 on Mac OS 10.12.6. 2K Flat, Interop, 24fps, 20 minute reels. Made from ProResHQ 1080p 25fps. The DCP is encrypted. Signing and encryption keys are the ones DCPoM made automatically. The reason given by MPS for QC fail is: /"The cpl has been incorrectly signed - UTF8 rather than ASN.1// // //The following flag occurred on ingest: Hashed OK, but with flags such as these in Wailua:// // //crt=mp+ROXiXhhwYBtsBVkeaURJZD5s=;String encoding of Issuer O is not ASN.1 PRINTABLESTRING: "UTF8STRING"// // //Now, whilst not a major issue – I wanted to flag it with you. It will play on most systems but there is a chance it may not on some players/servers.//"/ I've asked for the full Wailua output. Will post it here if I get it. Here is a link to the DCP-o-matic project folder + DCP (MXF files removed for size): https://fil.email/VUGNrpkk I've redacted the encryption key in metadata.xml and file paths in the DCPoM log files. The title of the film is not redacted but I would ask if everyone could please avoid mentioning it on the mailing list. I don't want to cause anyone embarrassment. Has anyone come up against this before? Many thanks, Jim