Hi all,

I want to weigh in on this from a legal perspective.  

The limitations on liabilities and indemnification provisions included in the 
Baseline Requirements and the EV Requirements are only binding on members of 
the Forum.  In other words, these limitations are not binding on parties such 
as Subscribers and Relying Parties, and they do not have to accept the stated 
amounts.  

So, CAs can try to obtain the limitations you’ve enumerated below, but they do 
not have to be accepted.  For example, a Subscriber could demand a unlimited 
liability, and the CA would have to decide how to proceed.

Also, what is “legally recognizable and provable claims” intended to cover, or 
exclude? 


Best regards,

Virginia Fournier
Senior Standards Counsel
 Apple Inc.
☏ 669-227-9595
✉︎ [email protected]






On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:33 AM, [email protected] wrote:

Send Public mailing list submissions to
        [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        [email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
        [email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Public digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability (Moudrick M. Dadashov)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 21:33:18 +0300
From: "Moudrick M. Dadashov" <[email protected]>
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>, CA/Browser Forum Public
        Discussion List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"



Hi Ben, yes, much better... thanks!
M.D.


Sent from my Samsung device

-------- Original message --------
From: Ben Wilson <[email protected]> 
Date: 10/12/17  21:27  (GMT+02:00) 
To: "Moudrick M. Dadashov" <[email protected]>, CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]> 
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability 

Moudrick and others,?Is the following proposed change to section 18 of the EV 
Guidelines more clear?18. ?Liability and IndemnificationCAs MAY limit their 
liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that 
a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally 
recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than one or any 
combination of the following: (1)??? two thousand US dollars ($2,000) - per 
Subscriber or Relying Party per EV Certificate;(2)??? one hundred thousand US 
dollars ($100,000) ? aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying 
Parties ? per EV Certificate; or(3)??? five million US dollars ($5,000,000) ? 
aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? for all EV 
Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. 
?Thanks,?Ben?From: Moudrick M. Dadashov [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 2:32 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Thanks, Ben.

Assuming that any combination (of 1,2, 3) or no combination at all would be 
acceptable, could we add something like "at least one or any combination of 
following" so that it is explicitly clear?

Thanks,
M.D.

CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline 
Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or 
Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount 
less than:? 

On 7/26/2017 5:12 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:Rather than tack on these two additional 
limits, what if it were simplified to read:?CAs MAY limit their liability as 
described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT 
limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized 
and provable claims to a monetary amount less than: ???????????????? (1)? two 
thousand US dollars per Subscriber or Relying Party per EV 
Certificate;???????????????? (2)? one hundred thousand US dollars ? aggregated 
across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? per EV Certificate; 
and/or???????????????? (3)? five million US dollars ? aggregated across all 
claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? for all EV Certificates issued by 
the CA during any continuous 12-month period. ?These limitations are 
notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the 
contrary.?A CA's indemnification obligations and a Root CA?s obligations with 
respect to subordinate
 CAs are set forth in Section 9.9 of the Baseline Requirements.????From: Public 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson via Public
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 6:37 PM
To: Moudrick M. Dadashov <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Would this 
work??Notwithstanding the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to 
Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to 
not less than: (1) one hundred thousand US dollars ? aggregated across all 
claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? per EV Certificate; and/or (2) five 
million US dollars ? aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying 
Parties ? for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 
12-month period. These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline 
Requirements purportedly to the contrary.?From: Moudrick M. Dadashov 
[mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:48 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Would you mind to show how 
it would sound now? :)

Thanks,
M.D.On 7/26/2017 2:14 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:And it should be an ?and? or a 
?but?, but rephrased nevertheless.?Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSPVP Compliance+1 
801 701 9678?From: Ben Wilson 
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:11 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>; Moudrick M. Dadashov <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Never mind ? I think I now 
see your point.? Not ?up to? it needs to be ?not less than $5 million.?? Would 
that make it clearer??Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSPVP Compliance+1 801 701 
9678?From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson 
via Public
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:10 PM
To: Moudrick M. Dadashov <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?It?s permissive ? a CA MAY 
limit its liability.?? Maybe we should say ?up to $5 million?. ??Then, would 
that be clearer - ?that it can be less than $5 million??Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, 
CISSPVP Compliance+1 801 701 9678?From: Moudrick M. Dadashov 
[mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:35 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?With "and" I don't see its 
optional.

Again, just to understand the model: is per EV certificate amount is NOT fixed 
whereas 12-month continuous amount is the only option ($5 mln.)?

Thanks,
M.D.? On 7/26/2017 1:28 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:All of the provisions would 
provide optional caps that CAs could place on EV liability.? The 12-month $5 
Million cap allows a CA to cap all EV liability to all those EV certificates 
issued within a single year.? ??Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSPVP Compliance+1 801 
701 9678?From: Moudrick M. Dadashov [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:24 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Ok. Do I understand the 
intention correctly: to have a "floating liability" amount per EV certificate 
and "fixed liability" amount per continuous 12-month period?

Thanks,
M.D.On 7/26/2017 1:10 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:No. Because they MAY do both.? An 
?or? would mean that they have to choose between the two, which isn?t the 
intent.?Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSPVP Compliance+1 801 701 9678?From: Moudrick 
M. Dadashov [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:09 PM
To: Ben Wilson <[email protected]>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion 
List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability?Hi Ben,

could it be "or" between (1) and (2)?

Thanks,
M.D.On 7/25/2017 11:59 PM, Ben Wilson via Public wrote:Here is another 
pre-ballot for discussion.?Ballot 209 - EV Liability?In Section 18 of the EV 
Guidelines, add the following sentences to the end of the first 
paragraph:?Notwithstanding the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to 
Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to: 
(1) one hundred thousand US dollars ? aggregated across all claims, 
Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? per EV Certificate; and (2) five million US 
dollars ? aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? for 
all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. 
These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements 
purportedly to the contrary.?Such that Section 18 of the EV Guidelines would 
read:?CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline 
Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or 
Relying Parties for leg
ally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than two thousand 
US dollars per Subscriber or Relying Party per EV Certificate. Notwithstanding 
the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties 
for legally recognized and provable claims to: (1) one hundred thousand US 
dollars ? aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? per 
EV Certificate; and (2) five million US dollars ? aggregated across all claims, 
Subscribers, and Relying Parties ? for all EV Certificates issued by the CA 
during any continuous 12-month period. These limitations are notwithstanding 
anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the contrary.?A CA's 
indemnification obligations and a Root CA?s obligations with respect to 
subordinate CAs are set forth in Section 9.9 of the Baseline Requirements.?Ben 
Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSPVP Compliance+1 801 701 9678?



_______________________________________________Public mailing 
[email protected]https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public?????
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5856 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5686 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5796 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment-0002.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5651 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment-0003.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5762 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment-0004.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image006.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5638 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/0ffbf98e/attachment-0005.jpg>

------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

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


------------------------------

End of Public Digest, Vol 66, Issue 46
**************************************

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

Reply via email to