Frank Hecker wrote [in part]:
> 
> As noted in prior discussions, the Mozilla Foundation and mozilla.org
> staff are considering adopting a formal policy regarding selection of
> new CA certificates for inclusion in the default certificate database
> distributed with Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird, etc. They have asked me
> to take the lead on attempting to create such a policy. As with prior
> policies I've been involved with (e.g., the policy for handling reports
> of Mozilla security vulnerabilities) my preferred approach is to try and
> develop this policy through a process of discussions in public forums
> and with parties affected by the policy (e.g., Mozilla developers and
> new CAs).
> 
> Here are my initial attempts at a policy and accompanying FAQ:
> 
>    http://www.hecker.org/mozilla/certificate-policy/
>    http://www.hecker.org/mozilla/certificate-faq/
> 

I reviewed both the policy and FAQ.  

My comments on the policy are in the PDF file at
<http://www.rossde.com/Mozilla_certs/Policy.pdf>.  These comments
are in the form of suggested revisions, highlighted in underlined
blue.  Those revisions primarily address how a CA's certificates
are approved for inclusion in the default database.  My concern is
that CA certificates should indeed be trusted.  

Specifically: 

#3:  I indicate that a CA that fails an audit or loses
accreditation should have its certificates removed and the removal
should be publicized.  Mozilla users should not rely on a
deficient CA.  

#6 (new):  I added this new section to indicate that only reliable
CAs should have their certificates in the default database. 
Rather than having the Mozilla Foundation investigate CAs for
reliability, I used standards based on the California
regulations.  Then the only effort required of the Foundation
would be to review an audit report and verify that the audit was
conducted by a qualified professional.  

#7 (new):  Despite wishes to the contrary, you cannot escape the
legalisms.  I suggest the Mozilla Foundation's lawyer should word
the necessary clause in your license.  Reliance on outside
standards and outside auditors (especially when that reliance is
already recognized in law in the state where the Foundation is
incorporated) will offer some protection against liability, but
you should also make sure the Foundation's general liability
insurance addresses this issue.  

My comments on the FAQ are in the PDF file at
<http://www.rossde.com/Mozilla_certs/FAQ.pdf>.  I had comments on
only two questions under "Details of the Mozilla Certificate
Policy", one of which relates back to my suggestions regarding the
policy.  

-- 

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>  

I use Mozilla as my Web browser because I want a browser that 
complies with Web standards.  See <http://www.mozilla.org/>.
_______________________________________________
mozilla-crypto mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto

Reply via email to