On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 12:49 PM Dimitris Zacharopoulos via
dev-security-policy wrote:
>
> The question I'm having trouble answering, and I would appreciate if
> this was answered by the Mozilla CA Certificate Policy Module Owner, is
>
> "does Mozilla treat this finding as a violation of the
What concerns me overall in this discussion is the fact that some CAs
thought it was completely acceptable to barely scrape through to meet the
most basic minimum of requirements. I hope these CAs have a better security
posture and are not operating at the minimum.
Thank you,
Burton
On Sat, Mar
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 2:49 PM Dimitris Zacharopoulos
wrote:
> The question I'm having trouble answering, and I would appreciate if this
> was answered by the Mozilla CA Certificate Policy Module Owner, is
>
> "does Mozilla treat this finding as a violation of the current language of
> section
Hi,
As others have already pointed out the subject in this thread is incorrect.
There are no, and has never been any, 63 bit serial numbers created by EJBCA.
As the specific topic has already been discussed, I just wanted to reference to
the post[1] with technical details, if anyone ends up
On 9/3/2019 2:37 μ.μ., Ryan Sleevi wrote:
I’m chiming in, Dimtris, as it sounds like you may have
unintentionally misrepresented the discussion and positions, and I
want to provide you, and possibly HARICA, the guidance and clarity it
needs in this matter.
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 12:46 AM
I’m chiming in, Dimtris, as it sounds like you may have unintentionally
misrepresented the discussion and positions, and I want to provide you, and
possibly HARICA, the guidance and clarity it needs in this matter.
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 12:46 AM Dimitris Zacharopoulos via
dev-security-policy
Matt's right, you need to discussion this on the CAB Forum.
Burton
On Sat, Mar 9, 2019 at 9:10 AM Matt Palmer via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 08:43:49PM -0600, Matthew Hardeman via
> dev-security-policy wrote:
> > I know this
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 08:43:49PM -0600, Matthew Hardeman via
dev-security-policy wrote:
> I know this isn't the place to bring a BR ballot, but I'm not presently a
> participant there.
My understanding is that discussing potential BR changes here is actively
counter-productive, because of
8 matches
Mail list logo
