On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 10:20:26AM +0300, 'Dimitris Zacharopoulos' via 
[email protected] wrote:
> In case people have missed it, this particular topic was discussed at the
> last CA/B Forum F2F meeting 
> <https://cabforum.org/2025/03/27/minutes-of-the-f2f-64-meeting-in-tokyo-japan-forum-level-march-25-26-2025/#panel-qa-with-all-guest-speakers>.
> I believe you will find useful information about the TRO process, especially
> in the United States, in Brian Holland's presentation 
> <https://cabforum.org/2025/03/27/minutes-of-the-f2f-64-meeting-in-tokyo-japan-forum-level-march-25-26-2025/1-CABF%20-%20Dealing%20with%20TROs%2020250325.pdf>.

Hey look, I'm CABF-famous!  (I don't know that I've ever been quoted in
a presentation before)

> One thing I recall from that discussion is that when a TRO is dismissed, the
> reasons of that dismissal are documented, especially if the TRO was granted
> on wrong basis, making it unlikely that another court will issue a TRO with
> the same justification as the previous one that got dismissed.

Your recollection is at odds with the minutes you linked to; "Brian"
(presumably Brian Holland, although there is ambiguity) is recorded to
have said "*Some* opinions are published" (emphasis added).  That same
point also says that "a judge *might* get mad enough that they talk to
the other judges" (again, emphasis added).  In other words, there's
still the possibility that a TRO might still be granted, and that's even
before we consider the many and varied jurisdictions that might be used.

> The fact that a TRO was issued to prevent certificates from being revoked
> doesn't necessarily mean that it will be an event that can be reproduced,
> especially if a court later reviews the case and dismisses the TRO after
> considering all the facts.

Well, if there's never another TRO incident, then there need never be
another delayed revocation, and the "delayed revocation ==
insta-distrust" rule need never be invoked, which means there's no
reason not to put it in the policy.

- Matt

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/addbf1e4-ccdd-4002-bfb3-8ba23ed9cbbc%40mtasv.net.

Reply via email to