<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=iso-2022-jp"><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:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo Car";
margin:0cm;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
span.HTMLconformatoprevioCar
{mso-style-name:"HTML con formato previo Car";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML con formato previo";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.EstiloCorreo25
{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:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
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=ES link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Hi Ian,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I don$B!-(Bt know if it$B!-(Bs too late but I$B!-(Bd also like you to have in mind these 2 ETSI standards that may help or at least align some of the information proposed for this ballot. These are:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>ETSI TS 119 432 v1.2.1 – Protocols for remote digital signature creation<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>ETSI TS 119 431-1 v1.2.1 – TSPs operating a remote QSCD/SCDev<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I think the latter is more appropriate for what we are discussion because the $B!H(Bprotocols$B!I(B document is a more technical implementation, pretty much ETSI style with the use of AdES formats and not within scope of these BRs, but just in case.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I$B!-(Bm willing to help/clarify you (or any other), as the voluntary editor for this ballot, some of the content and concepts in case you think is worthy.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I$B!-(Bve attached the documents for convenience.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-GB style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;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 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>De:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Cscwg-public <cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org> <b>En nombre de </b>Ian McMillan via Cscwg-public<br><b>Enviado el:</b> martes, 7 de diciembre de 2021 23:24<br><b>Para:</b> Adriano Santoni <adriano.santoni@staff.aruba.it>; cscwg-public@cabforum.org; Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) <dzacharo@harica.gr>; Bruce Morton <Bruce.Morton@entrust.com><br><b>Asunto:</b> Re: [Cscwg-public] [EXTERNAL] Re: Discussion: Proposed Ballot CSC-6: Update to Subscriber Private Key Protection Requirements<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:solid black 1.0pt;padding:2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='line-height:12.0pt;background:#FAFA03'><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Hi Folks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Coming out of our last call, I$B!G(Bve made all the updates we discussed including producing a definition for the term $B!H(Bhardware crypto module$B!I(B (see below). <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:36.0pt'><b><i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Hardware Crypto Module:</span></i></b><i><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> A tamper-resistant device with a dedicated cryptography processor used for the specific purpose of protecting the lifecycle of cryptographic keys (generating, managing, processing, and storing).<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Please see the attached redline now with all the latest updates and <b>provide feedback and willingness to endorse the ballot</b>. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Ian <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Cscwg-public <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org">cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Adriano Santoni via Cscwg-public<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, November 23, 2021 8:34 AM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cscwg-public] [EXTERNAL] Re: Discussion: Proposed Ballot CSC-6: Update to Subscriber Private Key Protection Requirements<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Hi all,</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>I find the language in "Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Code Signing.v2.6+CSC-6_redline_v2" rather confusing, about private key protection.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>It seems to me that section 16.3.1, in the added parts, only allows three options for protecting the private key effective Sep 1, 2022: </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>1) hosted hardware crypto module (in short "HCM")<br>2) cloud-based key generation and protection solution (backed by an HCM) (I am not clear what's the difference with #1)<br>3) signing service</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>But later on, section 16.3.2 seems to allow a wider range of options, including a suitable HCM shipped to the subscriber by the CA.</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Am I reading wrong? </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Also, I am not clear how option #3 in $B!x(B16.3.2 works: </span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>"3. The Subscriber uses a CA prescribed CSP and a suitable hardware module combination for the key pair generation and storage;"</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Anybody willing to explain?</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span lang=EN-US style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>Adriano</span><span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Il 23/11/2021 11:07, Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Cscwg-public ha scritto:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>On 18/11/2021 7:03 $B&L(B.$B&L(B., Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Cscwg-public wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><br>Ok, so you are thinking of a Subscriber that owns an HSM and gets an IT audit that has an audit report that asserts that all Keys associated with Code Signing Certificates are generated in an on-prem certified HSM. Is this what this method is supposed to cover?<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span lang=EN-US><br>After our recent meeting, we agreed to tweak the language of 4. to cover this use case described by Bruce. I recommend changing<br><br><i>"4. The Subscriber provides a suitable IT audit indicating that its operating environment achieves a level of security specified in section 16.3.1"</i><br><br>to<br><br><i>"4. The Subscriber provides an internal or external IT audit indicating that it is only using a suitable hardware module as specified in section 16.3.1 to generate keys pairs to be associated with Code Signing Certificates"</i><br><br>I also noticed that we don't have consistency among all listed options. Some options just say " suitable hardware module", others point to 16.3.1 and others say both. We could discuss at our next call or someone could take a stab at it and try to use consistent language.<br><br><br>Thanks,<br>Dimitris.<br><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre><span lang=EN-US>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US>Cscwg-public mailing list<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="mailto:Cscwg-public@cabforum.org">Cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span lang=EN-US><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.cabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fcscwg-public&data=04%7C01%7Cinigo.barreira%40sectigo.com%7Cff199c80e22347fb643f08d9b9d05711%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637745126754899566%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=UD5%2FMwdpHhMYizBd7GvFn1WotHCP21lKcNIQW%2F9RHKk%3D&reserved=0">https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/cscwg-public</a><o:p></o:p></span></pre></blockquote></div></div></body></html>