Sure, but I plan on uploading all these to the Mozilla dev list.  Emailing the 
CAB Forum as well seems like duplicative effort, especially since the emails 
aren’t going to be readily collaborated.  If the CABForum is going to collect 
the problem reports, some format other than email would be much better for data 
collection.

 

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 1:04 PM
To: Jeremy Rowley <[email protected]>
Cc: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 213 - Revocation Timeline Extension

 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 2:52 PM, Jeremy Rowley <[email protected] 
<mailto:[email protected]> > wrote:

I agree with the goal of getting this information out there, and using the CAB 
Forum this way seems in scope. Per the bylaws: “Members of the CA/Browser Forum 
have worked closely together in defining the guidelines and means of 
implementation for best practices as a way of providing a heightened security 
for Internet transactions and creating a more intuitive method of displaying 
secure sites to Internet users.” (Section 1)

 

However, I’m struggling to see why the CAB Forum would want to collect this 
info as a requirement rather than allowing CAs to submit the information 
voluntarily when there are questions.  Usually, we require the location of the 
disclosure be set in the CPS/CP, not as an email to the CAB Forum.  Shouldn’t 
we follow that format here?

 

Because this is an industry problem - and it's one that is either facilitated 
by or stymied by the collective Baseline Requirements and Root Program 
Requirements.

 

Our goals in Internet Security should be to establish a consistent baseline in 
the application of policies and practices. While we can disclose those in 
CP/CPS, that doesn't do anything to align consistency or promote information 
sharing. What we're discussing about is sharing information related to the 
challenges of adhering to the minimum required policies and practices, so we 
can improve both.

 

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to