<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 12 (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;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
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=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>In preparing to begin issuing EV Code Signing certificates, we noticed that the maximum validity for EV Code Signing is 39 months as per the BRs, not 27 months as per the EV Guidelines.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>My guess is that this is due to the fact that the EV Guidelines maximum validity was set before there were any other rules in place limiting the validity of certificates, but that since the EV Code Signing guidelines were put in place after the BRs had set max validity to 39 months that it was determined that the BR limit was enough.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>If that is indeed the case, and in the interest of consistency, how would the members feel about lifting the 27 month restriction on EV SSL certificates and settling on 39 month restriction across the board. If it is determined that moving to a 39 month restriction for EV SSL is not acceptable, then IMO EV Code Signing should also be restricted to 27 months.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy'>-- </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy'>Rich Smith<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy'>Validation Manager<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:navy'>Comodo</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="http://www.comodo.com/"><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>http://www.comodo.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>