Jakob wrote:
> The part needing clarification started with:
>
> > In addition to the questions posted by Wayne, I think it'd be useful
> > to confirm:
> > ...
I did not address that part of Ryan's post, but Tim's delayed message did
address it.
See
On 2020-10-16 12:33, Rob Stradling wrote:
...clarification of what meaning was intended.
Merely this...
"Hi Ryan. Tim Callan posted a reply to your questions last week, but his message
has not yet appeared on the list. Is it stuck in a moderation queue?"
The part needing clarification
> ...clarification of what meaning was intended.
Merely this...
"Hi Ryan. Tim Callan posted a reply to your questions last week, but his
message has not yet appeared on the list. Is it stuck in a moderation queue?"
___
dev-security-policy mailing
s intended.
From: dev-security-policy on behalf
of Jakob Bohm via dev-security-policy
Sent: 12 October 2020 22:41
To: mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Sectigo to Be Acquired by GI Partners
Hi Rob,
The e-mail you quote below seems to be ina
ting_style#Quoting_support_in_popular_mail_clients]
From: dev-security-policy on
behalf of Jakob Bohm via dev-security-policy
Sent: 12 October 2020 22:41
To: mozilla-dev-security-pol...@lists.mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Sectigo to Be Acquired by GI Partners
Hi Rob,
The e-mail
On Monday, October 12, 2020 at 6:28:06 PM UTC-4, Matt Palmer wrote:
Matt,
We can accurately remove the word meaningful from the earlier statement: We
anticipate no changes required to policies, operations, or personnel. If any
changes do occur in the future, we will of course update our CPS
On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 06:33:22AM -0700, Tim Callan via dev-security-policy
wrote:
> We anticipate no meaningful changes required to policies, operations, or
> personnel.
[...]
> In this case the required changes are virtually nothing.
These statements concern me somewhat, as reasonable
_
From: dev-security-policy on behalf
of Ryan Sleevi via dev-security-policy
Sent: 03 October 2020 22:16
To: Ben Wilson
Cc: mozilla-dev-security-policy
Subject: Re: Sectigo to Be Acquired by GI Partners
In a recent incident report [1], a representative of Sectigo noted:
The carv
On Saturday, October 3, 2020 at 5:16:41 PM UTC-4, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> 1. Is it expected that there will be similar system and/or infrastructure
> migrations as part of this? Sectigo's foresight of "no effect on its
> operations" leaves it a bit ambiguous whether this is meant as "practical"
>
To: Ben Wilson
Cc: mozilla-dev-security-policy
Subject: Re: Sectigo to Be Acquired by GI Partners
In a recent incident report [1], a representative of Sectigo noted:
The carve out from Comodo Group was a tough time for us. We had twenty
> years’ worth of completely intertwined systems that
: Sectigo to Be Acquired by GI Partners
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Rob: what, if any, changes will be made to the Sectigo CP/CPS as a result
of this change
In a recent incident report [1], a representative of Sectigo noted:
The carve out from Comodo Group was a tough time for us. We had twenty
> years’ worth of completely intertwined systems that had to be disentangled
> ASAP, a vast hairball of legacy code to deal with, and a skeleton crew of
>
Rob: what, if any, changes will be made to the Sectigo CP/CPS as a result
of this change of control?
Thanks,
Wayne
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 1:55 PM Ben Wilson via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:
> As announced previously by Rob Stradling, there is an
13 matches
Mail list logo
