<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"MS PGothic";
panose-1:2 11 6 0 7 2 5 8 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@MS PGothic";}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:JA;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Hey Bruce,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>This doesn’t change the need to have 2 separate audits for EV and non EV CS, correct?<br><br>Thanks<br>Dean<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>From:</span></b><span style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'> Cscwg-public <cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Bruce Morton via Cscwg-public<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, November 6, 2020 3:35 PM<br><b>To:</b> cscwg-public@cabforum.org<br><b>Subject:</b> [Cscwg-public] Ballot CSC-7: Update to merge EV and Non-EV clauses<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Purpose of Ballot CSC-7:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The CSC-2 merger of the Code Signing BRs and the EV Code Signing Guidelines was done without technical changes. The result is that we have some sections where there is different text for Non-EV and EV Code Signing certificates. In many cases there was no reason to have two different requirements. In other cases, it made sense that they both have the same requirement. There were of course some items where EV is different and these clauses were not touched for now. These items were all discussed in our bi-weekly meetings.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Other minor changes were the adding in a table for document revision and history and another table for effective dates within the BRs. There were also some errors corrected from the merger.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The proposed changes are redlined in the attached document. I am looking for two endorsers.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Thanks, Bruce.<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>