On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Kathleen Wilson <kwil...@mozilla.com>
wrote:

> On 3/30/16 1:53 PM, Jeremy Rowley wrote:
>
>> I think a required move away from SHA1 client certs requires a bit more
>> planning.
>>
>> 1) There hasn't been a formal deprecation of all SHA-1 certificates in
>> any root store policy. There has been a formal deprecation by the CAB Forum
>> of SHA1 server certificates. Considering many of the client cert issuance
>> is governed by various national schemes (FBCA in the US and the Qualified
>> Cert program in the EU), care is necessary in enacting policies that impact
>> the use of client certificates. Although I recognize the need for Mozilla
>> to ensure a safe onine experience for all its users, I'm sure they don't
>> want to undermine entire trust frameworks built on these certificates.
>> (Yes, I know FBCA requires SHA2 now).
>>
>> 2) The browsers are already deploying code to reject SHA1 certificates
>> encountered. If this is true, what is the harm in continued SHA1 client
>> certificate issuance until the national schemes have all updated their
>> requirements? Mozilla is protected but the national bodies (and financial
>> institutions) can continue using their software for client authentication.
>> I do think we should move to SHA2, but I don't think the prior notice has
>> occurred with respect to SHA1 client certs.
>>
>> 3) Because Mozilla doesn't have a policy against reissuance of SHA1
>> intermediates for client certificates, I don't think your suggestion to
>> only permit reissuance of limited SHA1 intermediates is feasible. I do
>> think requiring a constraint against general SHA1 intermediates (that lack
>> technical restrictions to prevent server certs) is a good idea to ensure
>> the intermediates are only used for s/MIME or code signing.
>>
>> 4) Documenting why outdated algorithms/key sizes/anything else are used
>> always ends up being "For support of legacy devices". I don't see much
>> value in that. It becomes an exercise in creating an automatic label
>> applied to each certificate.
>>
>> In all, I think clientAuth certs are different than serverAuth certs. CAs
>> issuing clientAuth certs wouldn't necessarily be aware of the intent to
>> deprecate.  I also do not think Mozilla has as large of stake in client
>> certificates as it does server certs. Therefore, any plan to move away from
>> SHA1 client certs should start with:
>> A) An announcement that client certs will be deprecated
>> B) A question to the public about what software is still requiring the
>> use of SHA1 certs and the impact of requiring SHA2 certs, and
>> C) A date when SHA1 client certs will be deprecated
>>
>> Again, I'm not opposed to moving to SHA2 client certs, but I don't think
>> Mozilla has conveyed to the public its intent to do so.
>>
>>
>>
>
> I think Jeremy is correct, that Mozilla's previous communications about
> SHA-1 certs was only in regards to TLS/SSL certs.
>
> Would anyone object to me changing Actions 1a and 1b to the following?
>

Looks reasonable to me.


> (note, using date 2016-04-01 for the CAs who don't have the Websites trust
> bit enabled will make it so we can easily filter out those responses)
> ~~
> ACTION #1a: As previously communicated, CAs should no longer be issuing
> SHA-1 certificates chaining up to root certificates included in Mozilla's
> CA Certificate Program. This includes TLS/SSL certificates, as well as any
> intermediate certificates that they chain up to. Check your systems and
> those of your subordinate CAs to ensure that SHA-1 based TLS/SSL
> certificates chaining up to your included root certificates are no longer
> being issued, and that any such certificates issued after 2016-01-01 have
> been revoked. Please enter the last date that a SHA-1 based TLS/SSL
> certificate was issued that chained up to your root certificates included
> in Mozilla's program. If your included root certificates do not have the
> Websites trust bit enabled, then please enter 2016-04-01. (Required)
>
>
> ACTION #1b: Enter the date when all of the SHA-1 based TLS/SSL
> certificates that chain up to your root certificates included in Mozilla's
> CA Certificate Program will either expire or be revoked. If your included
> root certificates do not have the Websites trust bit enabled, then enter
> 2016-04-01.
>
> As previously communicated we plan to show the “Untrusted Connection”
> error whenever a SHA-1 certificate is encountered in Firefox after January
> 1, 2017.
>
> We recommend that you put safeguards into place that will prevent the
> future issuance of SHA-1 based TLS/SSL and S/MIME certificates and SHA-1
> based intermediate certificates that chain up to your root certificates
> included in Mozilla's CA Certificate Program. (Required)
>
> ~~
>
>
> I think we can keep Action 1c as-is, because option (d) should capture
> information about issuance of S/MIME certs.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Kathleen
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dev-security-policy mailing list
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
>
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to