<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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
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><b>FINAL, APPROVED MINUTES of F2F:</b></p><p><em><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;font-style:normal'>CSCWG Meeting</span></em><i> <o:p></o:p></i></p><p>Leader: Bruce Morton (Entrust) Minutes: Dean Coclin Bruce read the anti-trust statement. Attendance: In the room: Leo Grove (SSL.com), Josef Nigut (Disig), Atsushi Inaba (Globalsign), Mike Agrenius Kushner (Keyfactor-Guest), Heinrik (Keyfactor - Guest), Clemens Wanko (ACAB-c), Aneta Wojcak (Microsoft), Martin Karterbarg (Sectigo), Corey Bonnell (DigiCert), Ben Wilson (Mozilla), Dean Coclin (DigiCert), Inigo Barreira (Sectigo), Dimitris Zacharopoulos (Harica), Tomasz Litarowicz (Certum), Paul vanBrowershaven (Entrust). Alexksandra Kurosz (Certum), Paulina Karwowska (Certum), Ewelina Chudy (Certum), Anna Sikorska (Certum), Aleksandra Iinicka (Certum). On the line: TIm Hollobeek (DigiCert), Wayne Thayer (Fastly), Aaron Paulson (Amazon), Adam Jones (Microsoft), Andrea Holland (SecureTrust), Bruce Wei (TrustAsia), Chris Kemmerer (SSL.com), Don Sheehy (WebTrust), Doug Beattie (Globalsign), Ian McMillan (Microsoft), Eva VanSteenberge (Globalsign), Hazhar Ismail (MSC Trustgate), Jeff Ward (WebTrust), Joanna Fox (Trustcor), Kharil Nizam (MSC Trustgate), Li-Chun Chen (Chungwa Telecom), Lynn Jeun (Visa), Marcelo Silva (Visa), Michael Sykes (SSL.com), Nargis Mannan (SecureTrust), Niko Carpenter (SecureTrust), Rollin Yiu (TrustAsia), Tadahiko Ito (Secom), Thomas Zermeno (SSL.com), Trevoli Ponds-White (Amazon), Tsung Min-Kuo (Chungwa Telecom), Tyler Myers (GoDaddy), Vijay Kumar (e-Muhdra), Wojciech Trapczynski (Certum), Yoshiro Yoneya (JPRS), Zurina Zolkaffly (MSC Trustgate). <o:p></o:p></p><p>The attached presentation was used as a guide for the meeting. Bruce opened by discussing the elections in the fall. Dean said elections will be opened 60 days prior to the expiration date, per the bylaws. Please start thinking of running if you are interested. <o:p></o:p></p><p>The first topic was the Signing Service Requirements (see slide 7). Bruce reviewed each bullet point. Tim said that one of the purposes of the signing service was to prevent fraud and we should add something about how the subscriber authenticates to the signing service. <o:p></o:p></p><p>Bruce then ran through the marked up version of the document to highlight the changes with regard to the signing services. (the marked up document, including notes and comments from the meeting, is included as part of the minutes). Dimitris suggested that having to authenticate for every signing in the same session would be problematic. Ian agreed and a discussion was had of some sort of token for a limited time, as a suggestion. This needs to be worked out. A discussion about changing key requirements from 140-2 to 140-3 took place and is reflected in that section of the document. A discussion about audits took place and section 8.4.1 was modified accordingly. <o:p></o:p></p><p>The next topic was around rules for cloud based key generation for a signing service (slide 8 in the deck). Inigo asked if they cloud provider needs to provide information for the audit (i.e. proof of keys in HSMs). How does one determine if it is in the cloud? Auditors would have difficulty accessing the cloud location. Tim asked how does one know that the HSM is handled securely? Ian said from what he has seen, the cloud providers provide a lot of certification proof as part of their services. But how do they prove they are a certified cloud provider? Dimitris said there are some ISO standards for data centers and cloud providers to cover that. Those could be added to the CSBRs. Tim said we should look at the cloud HSM providers and see what specs they follow. Inigo said that ENISA has some sort of cloud security specification which is more strict but not specific for PKI. Don said that cloud does bring up an issue of auditability and controls. A short discussion of audits for clouds took place. <o:p></o:p></p><p>What if the signing service stored the keys in the cloud but had the HSM onsite? Various opinions on how this work were discussed. Clemens said depending on the device certification, this would be covered. <o:p></o:p></p><p>The next topic was on high risk applicants. Nothing needs to be done before Nov 15th. <o:p></o:p></p><p>Timestamp updates: Slide 10 was discussed. Ian to follow up with Karina on the proposed update. A discussion about destroying the old key once the new key is in production took place. All agreed that was a good idea. Validity periods were discussed. Appears to be some benefit to Java of having 135 month validity. Bruce suggested a max of 54 months. Regarding the TS server Dimitris said it should be offline. All agreed. Bruce asked if the TS server should have its own CPS (i.e. TPS). There may be items that need to be disclosed. Tim didn't think there was value there. <o:p></o:p></p><p>Meeting minutes of the prior meeting (May 19th) were approved. <o:p></o:p></p><p>Revocation: Martijn presented some redlines to the revocation section 13.1.5.3 to make it less complicated. Bruce said he would be willing to support updating this section. Ian agreed that the definitions could use some cleanup. There was a discussion about obtaining telemetry data from Microsoft to help with this section. <o:p></o:p></p><p>Dimitris asked what the next steps were for future ballots. Martijn suggested we should have a cleanup ballot. Corey concurred and said we should wait until IPR clears for current ballot. After the cleanup ballot, then we can look at a signing service proposal. <o:p></o:p></p><p>The meeting for next Thursday (16th) will be canceled so the next meeting will be the 30th. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3'>Dean Coclin<o:p></o:p></span></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>