On 11/16/17 10:04 AM, Kathleen Wilson wrote:
On 11/13/17 1:52 PM, Kathleen Wilson wrote:
Link to November 2017 CA Communication on wiki page:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA/Communications#November_2017_CA_Communication
Direct link to the survey:
On 11/13/17 1:52 PM, Kathleen Wilson wrote:
Link to November 2017 CA Communication on wiki page:
https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA/Communications#November_2017_CA_Communication
Direct link to the survey:
All,
I have updated the draft of the November 2017 CA Communication as follows:
- Postponed the response deadline to December 15.
- Removed the CT item (that will be handled separately, later)
- Added an action item (#4) about full period-of-time audits with no
gaps. (resulted in a slight
It has been suggested that I need to communicate to CAs that there will
be consequences if their audit statements do not meet Mozilla’s
requirements, so how about if I add the following to the November CA
Communication?
~~
As stated in Mozilla’s April 2017 CA Communication[1] and Mozilla’s
On 27/10/17 00:23, Kathleen Wilson wrote:
> Looking forward to further discussion about which errata should be allowed.
Those are the correct two errata.
Gerv
___
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
On Wednesday, October 25, 2017 at 2:05:33 PM UTC-7, Andrew Ayer wrote:
> Hi Kathleen,
>
> I suggest being explicit about which CAA errata Mozilla allows.
>
> For CNAME, it's erratum 5065.
>
> For DNAME, it's erratum 5097.
>
> Link to errata:
ilson <kwil...@mozilla.com>
Cc: Kathleen Wilson via dev-security-policy
<dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org>;
mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: DRAFT November 2017 CA Communication
Hi Kathleen,
I suggest being explicit about which CAA errata Mozilla allows.
For
Hi Kathleen,
I suggest being explicit about which CAA errata Mozilla allows.
For CNAME, it's erratum 5065.
For DNAME, it's erratum 5097.
Link to errata: https://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6844
We don't want CAs to think they can follow any errata they like, or to
come up with
Some initial thoughts
1. I'm a bit confused by bullet #2 in the survey. Wasn't it already the
Mozilla policy that CAs could only use the blessed 10 methods of validation?
I thought this was communicated in the previous letter?
2. On bullet #3, I'm reading the wording to mean either 1) disclosed
9 matches
Mail list logo
