Hello Dimitris,
As I read the definition of “Linting”, it seems that the use of a manual (human
reviewed) process is within the allowed methodologies. I think more clarity
should be added to require an automated/software linting process over a
possible human-reviewed process, if not for
SSL.com votes “Yes” on SC-073.
-Tom
SSL.com
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Wayne
Thayer via Servercert-wg
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2024 7:00 PM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] Voting Period Begins - Ballot SC-073: Compromised
Begins]: SC-72 - Delete except to policyQualifiers
in EVGs; align with BRs by making them NOT RECOMMENDED
Sorry, this vote can´t be counted because arrived past the end time.
De: Servercert-wg mailto:servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org> > En nombre de Tom Zermeno via
Servercert-wg
Envi
SSL.com votes “Yes” on ballot SC-72.
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Paul van
Brouwershaven via Servercert-wg
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2024 7:01 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]: SC-72 - Delete except to
SSL.com votes yes to SC-65.
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Inigo
Barreira via Servercert-wg
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 9:34 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]: SC65: Convert EVGs into RFC
3647 format v2
SSL.com votes “Yes” to SC-69v3.
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Martijn
Katerbarg via Servercert-wg
Sent: Monday, March 4, 2024 4:59 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins]: SC-69v3 Clarify router and
firewall logging
Wayne,
I think it's safest to err on the side of caution and use the explicit wording
that you proposed.
Thanks,
Tom
From: Wayne Thayer
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2024 2:45 PM
To: Tom Zermeno
Cc: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
; Martijn Katerbarg
Wayne,
Regarding the change of the Debian weak keys statement at proposed line 1701:
is the statement intended to be a sub-clause of the second item in the sublist,
which would then make Debian weak keys exempt from the Fermat factorization
method check? Or, more likely based on the recent
SSL.com votes “Yes” to SC-070.
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Aaron
Gable via Servercert-wg
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2024 10:57 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] [Voting Period Begins] SC-070: Clarify the use of DTPs
for Domain
SSL.com votes “Yes” on SC-68.
From: Servercert-wg On Behalf Of Dimitris
Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Servercert-wg
Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2024 3:00 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List
Subject: [Servercert-wg] Voting Begins for Ballot SC-68: Allow VATEL and
10 matches
Mail list logo
