<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=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><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:"Segoe UI Emoji";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
p.elementtoproof1, li.elementtoproof1, div.elementtoproof1
{mso-style-name:elementtoproof1;
margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.elementtoproof
{mso-style-name:elementtoproof;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:881594942;
mso-list-template-ids:172686292;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:1734573743;
mso-list-template-ids:-1998397110;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:2035768177;
mso-list-template-ids:-1265598372;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:2127577877;
mso-list-template-ids:1778695208;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>I like Corey’s solution too.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>-Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> Martijn Katerbarg <martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com> <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 29, 2023 10:35 AM<br><b>To:</b> Corey Bonnell <Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com>; Bruce Morton <bruce.morton@entrust.com>; cscwg-public@cabforum.org; Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek@digicert.com><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>I’m good, thanks Corey. Comment closed<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div id=mail-editor-reference-message-container><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 29 November 2023 at 16:20<br><b>To: </b>Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>>, Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:bruce.morton@entrust.com">bruce.morton@entrust.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>>, Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Martijn,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> That line does indeed remain in the <b>original</b> proposal, see <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618">https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Argh, my bad. You’re right this still exists in the current proposal. I must have misread the diff in Github.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> Yea, that sounds like an excellent solution to me!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>This is now in Github: <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618">https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Please let me know if this looks good so we can close out the open comment in Github.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Corey</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 29, 2023 9:20 AM<br><b>To:</b> Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:bruce.morton@entrust.com">bruce.morton@entrust.com</a>>; Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>; Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=SV style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks for the reminder!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=SV style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> If we want to keep the sentence starting with “The CA MUST also maintain…”, then I agree with your suggestion to remove the term “high risk”. As a concrete proposal:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>That line does indeed remain in the <b>original</b> proposal, see <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618">https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31R618</a><br>Although I have to admit the GitHub rendering in this part is a bit off, that section of the language does remain, now in line 618, last sentence</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> If we want to keep the sentence starting with “The CA MUST also maintain…”, then I agree with your suggestion to remove the term “high risk”. As a concrete proposal:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>1.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Restore the deleted sentence</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Move the sentence on line 622 to the same paragraph as the restored sentence</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>3.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Tweak the language of the second sentence to:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> “The CA MUST use this internal database to follow the additional procedures defined in [Section 4.2.2](#422-approval-or-rejection-of-certificate-applications) of this document to ensure that the applicant will protect its Private Keys and not sign Suspect Code.”</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> Thoughts?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Yea, that sounds like an excellent solution to me!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Regards,<br><br>Martijn</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div id=divRplyFwdMsg><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Morton@entrust.com">Bruce.Morton@entrust.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 29 November 2023 at 15:05<br><b>To: </b>Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>>, Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>>, Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Guys,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Would like to get this closed. I am in favor of the original proposal or the option Corey has provided below. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><a id=OWAAMC398DF2E8BB04139AC2CE8CAE929888C href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com"><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;text-decoration:none'>@Martijn Katerbarg</span></a> please advise your direction.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks, Bruce.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 27, 2023 11:11 AM<br><b>To:</b> Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>>; Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Morton@entrust.com">Bruce.Morton@entrust.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>; Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] RE: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Martijn,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> Happy thanksgiving!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>> In my opinion, it’s not non-existent though.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>I thought the sentence you quoted is being deleted: <a href="https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31L620">https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files#diff-904962f0e52198f4a232d6ef6732d57ccb47433d4bba47b3472d681405360e31L620</a>.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>If we want to retain that sentence, then I agree that if you consider checking if the Applicant has previously signed Suspect Code as a “high risk” check, then there are still requirements in section 4.2.1. My thinking is that such a check is discrete from “high risk”, as the (now removed) definition only tangentially encompasses the Suspect Code case (“names contained in previously rejected certificate requests or revoked Certificates”). Thus, it is not clear what the term “high risk” is referring to.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>If we want to keep the sentence starting with “The CA MUST also maintain…”, then I agree with your suggestion to remove the term “high risk”. As a concrete proposal:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:0in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Restore the deleted sentence</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>2.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Move the sentence on line 622 to the same paragraph as the restored sentence</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoListParagraph style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2'><![if !supportLists]><span style='mso-list:Ignore'>3.<span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'> </span></span><![endif]><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Tweak the language of the second sentence to:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>“The CA MUST use this internal database to follow the additional procedures defined in [Section 4.2.2](#422-approval-or-rejection-of-certificate-applications) of this document to ensure that the applicant will protect its Private Keys and not sign Suspect Code.”</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thoughts?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Thanks,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Corey</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>> <br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 23, 2023 7:28 AM<br><b>To:</b> Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>>; Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:bruce.morton@entrust.com">bruce.morton@entrust.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>; Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=SV style='font-size:11.0pt'>Hi Corey,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=SV style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Happy thanksgiving!</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> I think at the very least the language needs to be modified to no longer imply that there are (non-existent) requirements in the current section.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>In my opinion, it’s not non-existent though. “The CA MUST also maintain and check an internal database listing Certificates revoked due to Code Signatures on Suspect Code and previous certificate requests rejected by the CA.” is a requirement. By then (re)adding “A CA identifying a high risk application under this section MUST follow the additional procedures defined in [Section 4.2.2](#422-approval-or-rejection-of-certificate-applications) of this document to ensure that the applicant will protect its Private Keys and not sign Suspect Code.”, it directly references Section 4.2.2, which will then contain “CAs MUST NOT issue new or replacement Code Signing Certificates to an entity that the CA determined intentionally signed Suspect Code.”<br><br>Without the paragraph, I feel like Section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2 aren’t directly connected, which would mean a CA would need to check its internal database of revoked certificates, but without any requirements on what to do with the outcome of that check.<br><br>Perhaps however we could rephrase the “disputed” paragraph a bit, to make this clearer, and remove “high risk” from it?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><br>Regards,<br><br>Martijn</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div id=mail-editor-reference-message-container><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Corey Bonnell <<a href="mailto:Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com">Corey.Bonnell@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 22 November 2023 at 19:42<br><b>To: </b>Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:bruce.morton@entrust.com">bruce.morton@entrust.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>>, Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>>, Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>Re: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>I’m not sure retaining the clause starting with “A CA identifying a high risk application under this section…” provides much clarity or value. Two reasons:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoListParagraph style='color:black;margin-left:0in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif'>All other language concerning high risk checks in section 4.2.1 has been struck. The turn of phrase “under this section” implies there are additional requirements defined in this section, but there are none. This will likely result in confusion.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoListParagraph style='color:black;margin-left:0in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif'>The requirement for the CA to confirm that the Applicant has not been the victim of multiple Takeover Attacks is still present in section 4.2.2. I’m not sure we need a reference to that requirement in another section.</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>I’m partial to removing the clause entirely. However, if the group agrees that it should be retained, then I think at the very least the language needs to be modified to no longer imply that there are (non-existent) requirements in the current section.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Thanks,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Corey</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'><hr size=1 width="100%" align=center></span></div><div id=divRplyFwdMsg><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;color:black'> Cscwg-public <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org">cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>> on behalf of Martijn Katerbarg via Cscwg-public <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 22, 2023 9:22 AM<br><b>To:</b> Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:bruce.morton@entrust.com">bruce.morton@entrust.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>>; Tim Hollebeek <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Cscwg-public] Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p>Hi Bruce,<br><br>Going for the full clarification:<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>The PR show that:<o:p></o:p></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=3 cellpadding=0><tr><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p>”Prior to issuing a Code Signing Certificate, each CA SHOULD check at least one database containing information about known or suspected producers, publishers, or distributors of Suspect Code, as identified or indicated by an Anti-Malware Organization and any database of deceptive names maintained by an Application Software Provider. The CA MUST determine whether the entity is identified as requesting a Code Signing Certificate from a High Risk Region of Concern. The CA MUST also maintain and check an internal database listing Certificates revoked due to Code Signatures on Suspect Code and previous certificate requests rejected by the CA. ”<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Is being replaced with:<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr></table><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=3 cellpadding=0><tr><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p>”Prior to issuing a Code Signing Certificate, each CA SHOULD check at least one database containing information about known or suspected producers, publishers, or distributors of Suspect Code, as identified or indicated by an Anti-Malware Organization and any database of deceptive names maintained by an Application Software Provider. The CA MUST also maintain and check an internal database listing Certificates revoked due to Code Signatures on Suspect Code and previous certificate requests rejected by the CA. ”<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><span class=elementtoproof>That makes sense. Then the PR goes on to additionally remove:</span><br><span class=elementtoproof>“A CA identifying a high risk application under this section MUST follow the additional procedures defined in [Section 4.2.2](#422-approval-or-rejection-of-certificate-applications) of this document to ensure that the applicant will protect its Private Keys and not sign Suspect Code.”</span><o:p></o:p></p><p><br>That’s the part I think should remain.<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr><tr><td style='padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt'><p><br>So yes, I think we’re on the same page with that one <span style='font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif'>😊</span><br><br>Regards,<br><br>Martijn<o:p></o:p></p></td></tr></table><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><div id="x_mail-editor-reference-message-container"><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Morton@entrust.com">Bruce.Morton@entrust.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Wednesday, 22 November 2023 at 14:34<br><b>To: </b>Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>>, <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a>>, Tim Hollebeek (<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>) <<a href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com">tim.hollebeek@digicert.com</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p>Hi Martijn,<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>For clarification, for the following two paragraphs which have been deleted, you would like the first deleted and the second to remain:<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'><s><span style='color:red'>Prior to issuing a Code Signing Certificate, each CA SHOULD check at least one database containing information about known or suspected producers, publishers, or distributors of Suspect Code, as identified or indicated by an Anti-Malware Organization and any database of deceptive names maintained by an Application Software Provider. The CA MUST determine whether the entity is identified as requesting a Code Signing Certificate from a High Risk Region of Concern. The CA MUST also maintain and check an internal database listing Certificates revoked due to Code Signatures on Suspect Code and previous certificate requests rejected by the CA.</span></s><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>A CA identifying a high risk application under this section MUST follow the additional procedures defined in [Section 4.2.2](#422-approval-or-rejection-of-certificate-applications) of this document to ensure that the applicant will protect its Private Keys and not sign Suspect Code.<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> <o:p></o:p></p><p>If so, I agree to this change. Please confirm.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><a id=OWAAMF9C3148C7DB4404DBBB23DFFEDAB8A4F href="mailto:tim.hollebeek@digicert.com"><span style='font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;text-decoration:none'>@Tim Hollebeek (tim.hollebeek@digicert.com)</span></a> does this work for you?<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Thanks, Bruce.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p><b>From:</b> Martijn Katerbarg <<a href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com">martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, November 22, 2023 3:32 AM<br><b>To:</b> Bruce Morton <<a href="mailto:Bruce.Morton@entrust.com">Bruce.Morton@entrust.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] Re: Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update<o:p></o:p></p></div><p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p>Bruce, I’ve added a single comment on the PR, as I think we’ve removed one paragraph too much. Other than that, I’m also happy to endorse.<o:p></o:p></p><p><br>Regards,<br><br>Martijn<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><div id="x_mail-editor-reference-message-container"><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black'>Cscwg-public <</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif'><a href="mailto:cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org">cscwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org</a><span style='color:black'>> on behalf of Bruce Morton via Cscwg-public <</span><a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><span style='color:black'>><br><b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 21 November 2023 at 20:25<br><b>To: </b></span><a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><span style='color:black'> <</span><a href="mailto:cscwg-public@cabforum.org">cscwg-public@cabforum.org</a><span style='color:black'>><br><b>Subject: </b>[Cscwg-public] Ballot CSC-??: High Risk Requirements Update</span></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div style='border:solid black 1.0pt;padding:2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt'><p style='line-height:12.0pt;background:#FAFA03'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;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.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Here is a draft of the High Risk Requirements update ballot. Looking for comments and 2 endorsers. There is no future effectivity date proposed, since the ballot does not add new requirements.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Thanks, Bruce.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black'>Purpose of the Ballot</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p>This ballot updates the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly‐Trusted Code Signing Certificates“ version 3.4 in order to clarify language regarding Signing Service and signing requests. The main goals of this ballot are to:<o:p></o:p></p><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Remove references to High Risk Certificate Request, since the CSBRs do not provide any actions for a high risk application.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Remove references to High Risk Region of Concern, since the CSBR appendix has never been populated.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Remove rules for a Takeover Attack to require the Subscriber to generate keys in a crypto device, since crypto device key generation is now a baseline requirement for all code signing certificates.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Remove option to transfer private key which has been generated in software.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cleanup to remove Subscriber key generation option which expired effective 1 June 2023.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>Cleanup to remove “any other method” to verify the Subscriber key was generated in a crypto device, since this option expired 1 June 2023.</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol><p>The following motion has been proposed by Bruce Morton of Entrust and endorsed by ?? and ??.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E101A'>MOTION BEGINS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=elementtoproof1><span style='font-size:11.0pt'>This ballot updates the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly‐Trusted Code Signing Certificates” ("Code Signing Baseline Requirements") based on version 3.4. MODIFY the Code Signing Baseline Requirements as specified in the following redline: <a href="https://url.avanan.click/v2/___https:/github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files___.YXAzOmRpZ2ljZXJ0OmE6bzpiNzQxNmRlMjNkMjlmN2JiMWRlMmQwZDlhZGFjN2YzNDo2OjE1MzA6MTgzMDJkZjgwZjQ5NDU3MzljY2EyODY5MGE0NzcwZDExY2ExMDE1ZWE5ZWUyOTNjNmEwMjQxYWYwMGQ5NWE4YTpoOkY" title="Protected by Avanan: https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files">https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/31/files</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><b><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0E101A'>MOTION ENDS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p>The procedure for this ballot is as follows:<span style='font-size:10.0pt'> Discussion (7 days)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:52.2pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>1.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Start Time: TBD</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:52.2pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>2.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>End Time: TBD</span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Vote for approval (7 days)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:52.2pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>3.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>Start Time: TBD</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='mso-margin-top-alt:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:52.2pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>4.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif'> </span><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>End Time: TBD</span><o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><i>Any email and files/attachments transmitted with it are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If this message has been sent to you in error, you must not copy, distribute or disclose of the information it contains. <u>Please notify Entrust immediately and delete the message from your system.</u></i><o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>