[pmacct-discussion] Failing to compile amqp

Hi, I'm trying to build with rabbitmq support, but it's complaining about kafka o_O $ git clone https://github.com/pmacct/pmacct.git $ cd pmacct $ ./autogen.sh $ ./configure --enable-rabbitmq --enable-jansson $ make ... CC libdaemons_la-amqp_plugin.lo amqp_plugin.c: In function

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 188 - Clarify use of term "CA" in Baseline Requirements

DigiCert votes "Yes" -Original Message- From: Dimitris Zacharopoulos [mailto:ji...@it.auth.gr] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 11:17 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; public@cabforum.org Cc: Tim Hollebeek <tholleb...@trustwave.com> Subject: Re: [cabfpub

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 188 - Clarify use of term "CA" in Baseline Requirements

ris. Ballot 188 - Clarify use of term "CA" in Baseline Requirements The following motion has been proposed by Dimitris Zacharopoulos of HARICA and endorsed by Ben Wilson of Digicert and Tim Hollebeek of Trustwave. Background: The Policy Review Working Group has completed its review of

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 185 (Revised) - Limiting the Lifetime of Certificates

DigiCert votes NO - we prefer a two-year certificate validity period and we're hopeful that with further discussion we can come to a consensus of two years. Our customers just aren't ready for a shorter certificate lifetime. From: Josh Aas via

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 183 was approved

The current bylaws are now posted on the website – <https://cabforum.org/bylaws/> https://cabforum.org/bylaws/ A redlined version is here: <https://cabforum.org/wiki/Bylaws> https://cabforum.org/wiki/Bylaws From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf O

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 183 was approved

My apologies, I think Kirk asked me to prepare an updated version. I’ll post one today. Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP VP Compliance +1 801 701 9678 From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Sleevi via Public Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 1:57 PM To: CA

Re: [cabfpub] SMIME Group Email List

I can maintain my own list, then. From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 9:30 AM To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org> Cc: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] SMIME Group Email List Prio

Re: [elixir-core:6832] [Proposal] Enum.sort for Dates

See an earlier discussion on a similar idea: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/elixir-lang-core/eE_mMWKdVYY On Friday, January 20, 2017 at 3:12:37 PM UTC-5, Paul Schoenfelder wrote: > > Sorry Josh, I should have replied to your original proposal. What I was > getting at is that you can

[cabfpub] Updated Baseline Requirements and EV Guidelines

The most current version of the Baseline Requirements (v.1.4.2) and EV Guidelines (v.1.6.1) are on the wiki, Github, and public web site. See https://cabforum.org/baseline-requirements-documents/ and https://cabforum.org/extended-validation/. Please let me know if you have any questions. Ben

RE: Update on transition of the Verizon roots and issuance of SHA1 certificates

I'll go through those in the next day or so and fix the CPS and audit settings. Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP DigiCert VP Compliance -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Rob Stradling Sent

Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 181 - ends January 7

DigiCert "Abstains" on Ballot 181 Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP VP Compliance +1 801 701 9678 From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via Public Sent: 02 January 2017 18:29 To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org&

Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot 180 - ends January 7

DigiCert "Abstains" on Ballot 180 Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP VP Compliance +1 801 701 9678 From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via Public Sent: 02 January 2017 18:28 To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org&

RE: Tidying up broken/duplicate CCADB disclosures - DigiCert

Re-sending without a digital signature. -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:53 AM To: Rob Stradling <rob.stradl...@comodo.com>; Kathleen

RE: Tidying up broken/duplicate CCADB disclosures - DigiCert

Thanks, Rob. I think I've cleaned up those two certificates in the CCADB, but double-check. -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Rob Stradling Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 7:40 AM To:

Re: [elixir-core:6643] Adding __APP__ or something similar

FWIW I have renamed a couple enormous projects and in all cases it took basically 2 find and replace runs and a folder move. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,

[elixir-core:6612] Re: Elixir Getting Started Guide Section for `use`

The documentation is pretty thorough here: http://elixir-lang.org/docs/master/elixir/Kernel.html#use/2 Honestly, use isn't really beginner material. What do you mean by "start using module that he himself wrote" ? On Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 6:54:32 PM UTC-5, Razvan Musetescu wrote: > >

RE: New SHA-1 certificates issued in 2016

Resending without a digital signature. -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 10:01 AM To: Patrick Figel <patfi...@gmail.com>; mozilla-dev-securi

RE: New SHA-1 certificates issued in 2016

be revoked. We'll follow up with a status report on our efforts sometime next week. Sincerely yours, Ben Wilson DigiCert VP of Compliance -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Figel Sent

RE: Draft Email - Non-Disclosed SubCAs

I think a one-click access to a PDF isn't available for some documents stored in searchable databases. The only way to get to some documents is to go to the database and conduct a search. From: Peter Bowen Sent: ‎10/‎21/‎2016 10:08 AM

[cabfpub] Call for Interest in Chartering S/MIME Working Group

This is a call for interest of CAB Forum members in participating in the chartering of a working group to work on S/MIME certificate guidelines. If you are interested, please send me an email and I'll add you to the group of interested members. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME

Re: [cabfpub] New ballot language to comply with IPR Policy

Using the proposal below (with a 60-day review period), would it be best to go back to version 1.3.7 of the Baseline Requirements and add the language of Ballot 173 (Removal of requirement to cease use of private key due to incorrect certificate info), Ballot 174 (Reform of Requirements Relating

[elixir-core:6444] Re: proposal: functional assertions, a case for assert_equal, assert_match, and possibly more

your feedback. Always interesting to build up a body of >> knowledge about how the community thinks about a particular subject. >> >> @eric: Why do you think they are both imperative, and how would you make >> them more declarative? Very interested! >> >> Ch

RE: Audit requirements

What about subordinate CAs created after the audit letter is published? If both WebTrust and ETSI audit schemes assume ongoing audit reporting responsibilities, I'd assume that you wouldn't need a new audit letter every time you create a subordinate CA, which might be weekly. The list of

Re: [elixir-core:6325] Improvement: the syntax for importing functions from modules

Here's the thing. Right now import doesn't require any special syntax. It's data driven, and uses elixir structures that already exist and are usable. Every single option you listed requires changes to the parser, new language constructs or both. All to do exactly what we can right now. I don't

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 problem report

I think those two suggested changes are relatively minor and should be made on GitHub where they’ll be tracked. I think they should be made without the necessity of a ballot. From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Robin Alden Sent: Thursday,

Re: [elixir-talk:13659] Re: Elixir best practice for setting two values on a condition

d the right holds the 'data' to the > right of your 'cursor', where the cursor is just the current position along > the entire structure. > > Zippers can also be more complicated as well, allowing you to efficiently > and immutable walk along an entire tree structure back and forth

[elixir-core:6257] Re: [proposal] Consider supporting a map shorthand syntax

You necro'ed a thread that was effectively a year old, it isn't an ideal place to receive feedback. Maybe try posting on the elixir forum? On Sunday, August 28, 2016 at 1:13:55 PM UTC-4, Hassan Zamani wrote: > > No comments? > > On Saturday, August 13, 2016 at 2:53:56 PM UTC+4:30, Hassan Zamani

Re: [cabfpub] Suggestion to amend BR Section7.1.4.2.2d/e RE: EV Gudelines section 9.2.5 & X.520

From: 陳立群 [mailto:real...@cht.com.tw] Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2016 10:36 PM To: 'Kirk Hall' <kirk.h...@entrust.com>; Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; 'Erwann Abalea' <erwann.aba...@docusign.com> Cc: 'CABFPub' <public@cabforum.org> Subject: RE: [cabfpub

Re: [cabfpub] Governance Reform Discussion

Any suggestions? The Governance Reform Working Group meets again next Tuesday. From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 1:00 PM To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: [cabfpub] Governance Reform Disc

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 174 - Reform of Requirements Relating to Conflicts with Local Law

DigiCert votes “yes” From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 3:03 AM To: CABFPub Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 174 - Reform of Requirements Relating to Conflicts with Local Law

Re: [cabfpub] Suggestion to amend BR Section7.1.4.2.2d/e RE: EV Gudelines section 9.2.5 & X.520

4:57 AM To: 'Erwann Abalea' <erwann.aba...@docusign.com> Cc: 'CABFPub' <public@cabforum.org>; Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Suggestion to amend BR Section7.1.4.2.2d/e RE: EV Gudelines section 9.2.5 & X.520 1. In RFC 3739- Int

[cabfpub] Governance Reform Discussion

The following was discussed during last week’s and today’s Governance Reform Working Group meetings: DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION ONLY 1. The Forum would amend the Bylaws to create three working groups (including detailed statement of scope, deliverables, and expiration date, if any): ●

Re: [elixir-talk:13602] List insert_at with empty list returns '\a'

d > out doesn't look like a list. > > Just my 2 -- > > > Enjoy the Olympics! > B > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 6:41 PM, Ben Wilson <benwil...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> You can read more about it in the getting started guides: >> http://elixir-lang.org

Re: [elixir-talk:13598] List insert_at with empty list returns '\a'

You can read more about it in the getting started guides: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/binaries-strings-and-char-lists.html On Monday, August 8, 2016 at 8:27:23 PM UTC-4, Louis Pilfold wrote: > > Hey > > [7] == '\a' > > Single quote strings are actually lists of characters, so when

[cabfpub] CABF Membership and ETSI EN 319 411

Currently section 2.1 of the Bylaws states that a CA must have a current and successful WebTrust for CAs audit, or ETSI 102042 or ETSI 101456 audit report prepared by a properly-qualified auditor. Shouldn't we amend the bylaws to state, "or an ETSI TS 102 042, ETSI TS 101 456, or ETSI EN 319 411

Re: [cabfpub] Acceptable values for countryName

I think we should do something to make it more clear that you can use any ISO 3166-1 country/territory code. What if we added "or territory code" to sections 7.1.2.1.e, 7.1.2.2.h, and 7.1.4.2.g, so that 7.1.2.1.e and 7.1.2.2.h would say, "the two-letter ISO 3166-1 country code or territory

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements

] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:26 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements Regrettably, despite multiple readings throughout this, I appear to have missed some things in the

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements

Is there a working group call tomorrow? From: Kirk Hall [mailto:kirk.h...@entrust.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 7:43 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; 'CABFPub' <public@cabforum.org> Subject: RE: Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements Ben, I see

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 173 - Removal of requirement to cease use of private key due to incorrect certificate info

n Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Josh Aas <j...@letsencrypt.org> wrote: >> Ballot 173 - Removal of requirement to cease use of private key due >> to incorrect certificate info >> >> The following motion has been proposed by Josh Aas of ISRG / Let's >> Encrypt. Ben Wil

Re: [cabfpub] Formatting error in BRs, par 8.2

Fixed. From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Adriano Santoni Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2016 12:52 AM To: CAB Forum Subject: [cabfpub] Formatting error in BRs, par 8.2 All, I think I found a formatting problem in BRs,

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements

: geo...@apple.com [mailto:geo...@apple.com] Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 12:31 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 169 - Revised Validation Requirements > On 22 Jul. 2016, at 11:06 am, Ben Wilson <ben.w

[elixir-core:6143] Re: why are zero arity anonymous functions not allowed?

The title is a bit misleading as it implies that Elixir doesn't have `fn -> "yo" end`, but at least that's cleared up in the body. I do think it can be useful, IE `Task.async((args))` is more succinct than `Task.async(fn -> foo(args) end)`. Spawning processes and the like are about the only

[elixir-talk:13485] Re: Macro & unsafe variable warning

ourth | list] > else > list > end > > First: this is useless for us because our macro must apply a standard > behaviour in an hypothetical else clause and deny the caller to have a > different behaviour. > Second: in my opinion this is an outrage of

[elixir-talk:13481] Re: Macro & unsafe variable warning

hy elixir force me to put a "useless" else clause and > lowering readability? > > On Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 5:17:10 PM UTC+2, Ben Wilson wrote: >> >> The compiler suggests you re-write it as >> >> list = [:one] >> >> list = if false do >>

[elixir-talk:13478] Re: Macro & unsafe variable warning

The compiler suggests you re-write it as list = [:one] list = if false do [:two | list] else list end In your case you have no `else` clause, so if the `if` clause fails, it returns nil, which sets `list` to nil. On Thursday, July 14, 2016 at 10:46:00 AM UTC-4, Fiorillo Nicola wrote: > >

Re: [elixir-talk:13472] Re: question to mix and hex.pm (equivalent to python pip ?)

to install > globally libs but I believe it can brings problems with dependency versions > more frequently. > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 8:23 AM, derek <den...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Ben Wilson <benwil...@gmail.com >> >

Re: [cabfpub] Reply: Bylaw correction pre-ballot

I went ahead and replaced the “6” with an “f”. From: 张翼 [mailto:zhan...@cfca.com.cn] Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 7:46 PM To: 'Ryan Sleevi' <sle...@google.com>; Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: 'Dean Coclin' <dean_coc...@symantec.com>; public@cabforum.org Subjec

Re: [cabfpub] Bylaw correction pre-ballot

Would anyone have an objection if we just changed the "6" to an "f" since it's an obvious erratum / minor transcription error? From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dean Coclin Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2016 3:47 PM To: public@cabforum.org Subject:

[elixir-talk:13453] Re: question to mix and hex.pm (equivalent to python pip ?)

Global package installation is also a constant source of problems when they conflict. That isn't to say that there aren't scenarios where it's handy. However great care needs to be taken when it comes to make code globally available as we don't want to end up in dependency hell. It's also

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

DigiCert votes "Yes" From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 9:18 AM To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy Ballot 164 - Certifica

Re: [cabfpub] EV Gudelines section 9.2.5 & X.520

To help this discussion along, here is a transcript of yesterday’s Policy Review Working Group meeting: Li-Chun: I would like to address the Subject Name issue and a new issue, which is the proprietary OID of Microsoft for jurisdiction of incorporation. We feel we need to prepare a

Online Trust Alliance Honor Roll Briefing

For anyone interested, the Online Trust Alliance is giving two webinars tomorrow on the results of its annual Honor Roll. https://otalliance.org/initiatives/honor-roll-history Among other things, the annual honor roll looks at web site security of top 100 sites using the Qualys/SSLLabs tool.

[cabfpub] Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy This ballot has been proposed by Jacob Hoffman-Andrews of Let's Encrypt and endorsed by Ben Wilson of DigiCert and Tim Hollebeek of Trustwave: Statement of intent: As demonstrated in https://events.ccc.de/congress/2008/Fahrplan/attachments

RE: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

fic case, since the Federal Bridge is a known issue," as an indication that I do not need to disclose the DigiCert Federated ID CA-1 in the Salesforce database. -Original Message- From: Peter Bowen [mailto:pzbo...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 3:35 PM To: Eric Mill <e...@konkl

RE: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

com>; Steve <steve.me...@gmail.com>; mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org; Kathleen Wilson <kwil...@mozilla.com>; Rob Stradling <rob.stradl...@comodo.com>; Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Subject: Re: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

RE: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

It seems to me that requiring the registration of these subordinate CAs bloats the Salesforce database unnecessarily. -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Rob Stradling Sent: Wednesday, June

RE: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

-Original Message- From: Rob Stradling [mailto:rob.stradl...@comodo.com] Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:17 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: Peter Bowen <pzbo...@gmail.com>; mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org Subject: Re: Intermediate certificate disc

Re: [cabfpub] 9.6.3 and Private Key use

That works. -Original Message- From: Gervase Markham [mailto:g...@mozilla.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 4:14 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; Josh Aas <j...@letsencrypt.org>; CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] 9.6.3 and Private Key u

RE: Intermediate certificate disclosure deadline in 2 weeks

When I try to upload some of these listed as "Unconstrained id-kp-serverAuth Trust" undisclosed, I get a warning that says, "This certificate is considered to be technically-constrained as per Mozilla policy, so it does not need to be added to the CA Community in Salesforce. All data that you

[elixir-core:5915] Re: Proposal: Map.filter_values and Map.filter_keys

Your example implementation shows why this isn't really necessary. Moreover it doesn't compose well. Consider: map |> Enum.filter(fn {k, v} -> key_filter(k) && value_filter(v) end) |> Map.new vs map |> Map.filter_keys(key_filter) |> Map.filter_values(value_filter) In the latter it starts as a

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 171 - Updating ETSI standards in CABF documents

I have revised the GitHub documents accordingly, but I also changed the references to dates in the 8.4 of the BRs to say “1 July 2016” instead of “July 1st 2016” and “1 July 2017” instead of July 1st 2017” in accordance with accepted / CABF-generally-used style. I would also suggest you

Re: [cabfpub] Voting process clarification

quorum, 1 yes vote and 2 abstentions gets counted as 100% yes votes by browsers, meeting the 50%+1 requirement. On 6/16/2016 8:52 AM, Ben Wilson wrote: No. That would not meet the threshold. Abstention is for purposes of calculating quorum only. -Original Message- From: public-boun

Re: [cabfpub] Voting process clarification

No. That would not meet the threshold. Abstention is for purposes of calculating quorum only. -Original Message- From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Peter Bowen Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 7:51 AM To: CABFPub

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 170 - Amend Section 5.1 of Baseline Requirements

Voting ends tomorrow, and quorum is 10. I'd strongly urge support of this ballot, as indicated by my other posts. From: Ben Wilson Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 9:11 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Ballot 170 - A

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 170 - Amend Section 5.1 of Baseline Requirements

See responses inline below > >-Original Message- From: Gervase Markham [mailto:g...@mozilla.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 9:41 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; Ryan Sleevi <sle...@google.com> Cc: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: Re: [cab

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 170 - Amend Section 5.1 of Baseline Requirements

NIST IR 7924 5.1.6 NIST IR 7924 5.1.7 Federal Bridge CP 5.1.8 NIST IR 7924 (modified) Ben From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 7, 2016 5:51 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com&

[cabfpub] Ballot 170 - Amend Section 5.1 of Baseline Requirements

Ballot 170 - Amend Section 5.1 of Baseline Requirements The Policy Review Working Group has reviewed Section 5.1 of the Baseline Requirements and, as a result, suggests that certain changes be made. Therefore, the following motion has been proposed by Ben Wilson of DigiCert and endorsed by Robin

[elixir-core:5856] Re: Wrapping erlang modules with notoriously bad error messages

great. On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 11:11:16 AM UTC-4, Myron Marston wrote: > > Maybe we could submit PRs to Erlang/OTP itself to improve the error > messages. That way, it helps Erlang developers and helps us :). > > Myron > > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 4:53:55 AM UT

Re: [cabfpub] Questions about 2016 Microsoft Root Program Changes

Jody, Li-Chun Chen would like to ask about implementation of the requirement for three intermediate CAs for server, code signing, and client certificates -- after the break. Thanks, Ben From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of ??? Sent:

RE: When does Technically Constrained != Technically Constrained?

What about when Microsoft starts to rely on the SalesForce database? Won't they want more information, including code signing and other information they might consider relevant? -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy

RE: SSL Certs for Malicious Websites

Gerv wrote, "Counter-question to many of these: who defines what is malware, and who made them king?" The contract that the CA enters into with the subscriber should have done that. Subscriber Agreements should have language in them that says something to the effect, "We can revoke your

Re: [elixir-core:5698] Add boolean methods for different unicode character groups (String.alphanumeric?, etc)

http://nerves-project.org/ Enjoy :) On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 12:36:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Wildgoose wrote: > > On 05/05/2016 17:44, w.m.w...@student.rug.nl wrote: > > > - when included in the stdlib, compiling/usin Elixir on embedded devices > becomes impossible because of the increased file size.

RE: Data entry errors (was Re: Undisclosed CA certificates)

I think I fixed it by pasting in the right PEM. -Original Message- From: Rob Stradling [mailto:rob.stradl...@comodo.com] Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 2:07 PM To: mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org; Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Subject: Data entry errors (

Re: [cabfpub] IPR Exclusion notices

This might be moot due to the fact that the Symantec exclusion notice covered the same patents as its previously filed exclusion notice from severs years ago. From: Ryan Sleevi Sent: ‎5/‎8/‎2016 2:06 PM To: Dean

Re: [cabfpub] Exclusion Notices

I've posted Symantec's recent notice. Please review https://cabforum.org/ipr-exclusion-notices/ -Original Message- From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dean Coclin Sent: Thursday, May 5, 2016 12:06 PM To: Peter Bowen Cc:

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 168: Baseline Requirements Corrections (Revised)

DigiCert votes yes, noting as Mads did that the reference should state "NIST SP 800-56A, Revision 2". -Original Message- From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Mads Egil Henriksveen Sent: Tuesday, May 3, 2016 11:51 PM To: Peter Bowen

RE: Undisclosed CA certificates

How much lead time do CAs need? Or will that depend on what the language of the ballot says? Right now, we're leaning toward requiring CSPRNG, defined as "a random number generator intended for use in cryptographic systems". -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy

Re: [cabfpub] Membership reinstatements

Peter, I'm trying to see where Ballot 169 was set forth as a real ballot and not just as a pre-ballot. Thanks, Ben -Original Message- From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Peter Bowen Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 8:04 AM To: Dean Coclin

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

, May 3, 2016 12:33 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; Erwann Abalea <erwann.aba...@docusign.com> Cc: Ryan Sleevi <sle...@google.com>; CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy Ben, The reas

RE: Undisclosed CA certificates

If the CA/Browser Forum were to articulate such a requirement, i.e., "at least 64 bits in the serial SHALL be generated using a CSPRNG", then what is a reasonable amount of lead time to give CAs to incorporate this requirement into their systems/processes? -Original Message- From:

Re: [cabfpub] Spurious spaces in BR PDFs

I welcome any suggestions that make it easier for me to upload these PDFs based on the GitHub version. (Email them to me and I’ll upload them instead of the Word-based ones) From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Jacob Hoffman-Andrews Sent:

Re: [cabfpub] Latest BR edit as a result of Ballot 162

Fixed. You may need to refresh if the pdf document is cached. The WP source files are uploaded to the wiki. Also, the version on GitHub has been updated. From: Dean Coclin [mailto:dean_coc...@symantec.com] Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 1:23 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com&

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

I’d like suggestions on an effective date. From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 2:23 AM To: public@cabforum.org Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy On

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

Then I'll move forward with the ballot if we have two endorsers. -Original Message- From: Peter Bowen [mailto:p...@amzn.com] Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 9:16 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pr

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

I didn’t think it was that simple. For instance, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Password_strength From: Erwann Abalea [mailto:erwann.aba...@docusign.com] Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 8:44 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org> Subject:

[cabfpub] FW: Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

Forwarding From: Man Ho (Certizen) [mailto:ma...@certizen.com] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 7:51 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; Ryan Sleevi <sle...@google.com> Cc: public@cabforum.org Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

You’re right, given a randomly generated 20-byte serial number, you have 159 unpredictable bits. From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sle...@google.com] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 2:03 PM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com> Cc: Man Ho (Certizen) <ma...@certizen.com>; public@

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

From: Man Ho (Certizen) [mailto:ma...@certizen.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2016 12:27 AM To: Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@digicert.com>; public@cabforum.org Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy Hi all, Is the meaning of "at least 64 unpredi

[cabfpub] Current Versions of Baseline Requirements and EV Guidelines

The Baseline Requirements and the EV Guidelines have been updated on the CA/Browser Forum website here, https://cabforum.org/baseline-requirements-documents/, and here, https://cabforum.org/extended-validation/, respectively. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: statistics-channels not serving rdtype records

John Miller <johnm...@brandeis.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Ben Wilson <doubting...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm not sure what is different on a new server I'm setting up, but when > > querying the port configured for statistics-channel

statistics-channels not serving rdtype records

Hi, I'm not sure what is different on a new server I'm setting up, but when querying the port configured for statistics-channels, no rdtype records are included. resstat, socket, task, etc are all there, but not the number of queries. My version: ii bind9

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 166: Membership requirement update

DigiCert votes "yes" From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dean Coclin Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 1:53 PM To: CABFPub Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 166: Membership requirement update Ballot 166: Clarification of Membership

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-ballot on membership requirement update

I’ll take a look at them. From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Peter Bowen Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2016 12:54 PM To: Dean Coclin Cc: CABFPub ; Stephen Davidson

RE: Policy revision proposal - transitive disclosure exception

to be populated twice? Once under the 2015-SHA1 cross certificate and again under the 2016-SHA2 cross certificate? -Original Message- From: Ben Wilson Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 12:57 PM To: 'Peter Bowen' <pzbo...@gmail.com>; Kathleen Wilson <kwil...@mozilla.com> Cc: mozilla-dev-

Perhaps useful for the SSE cable report

Prof Ben Wilson (University of the Highlands & Islands - SAMS & Inverness College) Twitter @bwilson999 On 1 Mar 2016, at 17:38, Holly Morin <holly_mo...@uri.edu<mailto:holly_mo...@uri.edu>> wrote: **apologies for cross-postings** Members of the international regul

Re: Perhaps useful for the SSE cable report

Please ignore (meant as forward) Prof Ben Wilson (University of the Highlands & Islands - SAMS & Inverness College) Twitter @bwilson999 On 2 Mar 2016, at 07:27, Ben Wilson <ben.wil...@sams.ac.uk<mailto:ben.wil...@sams.ac.uk>> wrote: Prof Ben Wilson (Univers

Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy

c-boun...@cabforum.org <mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org> [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 1:50 PM To: CABFPub Subject: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Number Entropy For discussion: Pre-Ballot 164 - Certificate Serial Nu

Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 161 - Notification of incorrect issuance

DigiCert votes "no" -Original Message- From: public-boun...@cabforum.org [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Sigbjørn Vik Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 1:32 AM To: public@cabforum.org Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 161 - Notification of incorrect issuance Ballot 161 -

RE: Policy revision proposal - transitive disclosure exception

That makes sense. -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of Peter Bowen Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 12:50 PM To: Kathleen Wilson Cc:

RE: More SHA-1 certs

Aren't all of these CA certificates? -Original Message- From: dev-security-policy [mailto:dev-security-policy-bounces+ben=digicert@lists.mozilla.org] On Behalf Of martin.suc...@gmail.com Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 1:13 PM To: mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org Subject:

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   >