On 20/04/17 14:46, Gervase Markham wrote:
> So, proposed new text:
>
> "CAs MUST revoke Certificates that they have issued upon the
> occurrence of any event listed in the appropriate subsection of section
> 4.9.1 of the Baseline Requirements (for email certificates, not
> including those events
On 21/04/2017 00:36, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Jakob Bohm via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
Technically, the part after the @ could also be a bang!path, though
this is rare these days.
No, technically, it could not.
RFC 5280,
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Jakob Bohm via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
>
> Technically, the part after the @ could also be a bang!path, though
> this is rare these days.
>
No, technically, it could not.
RFC 5280, Section 4.2.1.6. Subject Alternative
On 20/04/2017 21:15, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
Gerv,
I must admit, I'm not sure I understand what you consider irrelevant
reasons for 4.9.1 in the context of e-mail addresses.
The only one I can think of is
"7. The CA is made aware that a Wildcard Certificate has been used to
authenticate a
Gerv,
I must admit, I'm not sure I understand what you consider irrelevant
reasons for 4.9.1 in the context of e-mail addresses.
The only one I can think of is
"7. The CA is made aware that a Wildcard Certificate has been used to
authenticate a fraudulently misleading
subordinate Fully-Qualified
On 20/04/17 15:10, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> Note that some reasons applicable to domain names would be equally
> applicable to the domain name part of e-mail addresses.
So can you read section 4.9.1 of the BRs and help me to define wording
which excludes the irrelevant items while including all the
6 matches
Mail list logo
