<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body>
<div>Hi Ben, yes, much better... thanks!</div><div><br></div><div>M.D.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><div style="font-size:88%;color:#364f67" dir="auto">Sent from my Samsung device</div></div><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Ben Wilson <ben.wilson@digicert.com> <br>Date: 10/12/17 21:27 (GMT+02:00) <br>To: "Moudrick M. Dadashov" <md@ssc.lt>, CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org> <br>Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability <br><br><div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext">Moudrick and others,<o:p></o:p></span></a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext">Is the following proposed change to section 18 of the EV Guidelines more clear?<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><h1 style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo4"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><a name="_Toc378600390"></a><a name="_Toc412465052"></a><a name="_Toc425850468"><span style="mso-bookmark:_Toc412465052"><span style="mso-bookmark:_Toc378600390"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">18.<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]--> Liability and Indemnification</span></span></a><o:p></o:p></span></h1><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose">CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than <u><span style="background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow">one or any combination of the following</span>: </u><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:6.8pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3;text-autospace:ideograph-other"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(1)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]-->two thousand US dollars <u>($2,000) -</u> per Subscriber or Relying Party per EV Certificate<u>;<o:p></o:p></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:6.8pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3;text-autospace:ideograph-other"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(2)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]--><u>one hundred thousand US dollars ($100,000) – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – per EV Certificate; or<o:p></o:p></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-margin-top-alt:6.8pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3;text-autospace:ideograph-other"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-list:Ignore">(3)<span style="font:7.0pt "Times New Roman""> </span></span><!--[endif]--><u>five million US dollars ($5,000,000) – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period</u>. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext">Ben<o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"><span style="color:windowtext"><o:p> </o:p></span></span></p><span style="mso-bookmark:_MailEndCompose"></span><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Moudrick M. Dadashov [mailto:md@ssc.lt] <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 26, 2017 2:32 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <ben.wilson@digicert.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Cambria",serif">Thanks, Ben.<br><br>Assuming that any combination (of 1,2, 3) or no combination at all would be acceptable, could we add something like "at least one or any combination of following" so that it is explicitly clear?<br><br>Thanks,<br>M.D.<br><br>CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than: <br><br></span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 7/26/2017 5:12 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Rather than tack on these two additional limits, what if it were simplified to read:</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than: <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.8pt;text-align:justify;text-autospace:ideograph-other"> <u>(1)</u> two thousand US dollars per Subscriber or Relying Party per EV Certificate<u>;</u><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.8pt;text-align:justify;text-autospace:ideograph-other"><u> (2) one hundred thousand US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – per EV Certificate; and/or</u><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:6.8pt;text-align:justify;text-autospace:ideograph-other"><u> (3) five million US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. </u><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u>These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the contrary.</u><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">A CA's indemnification obligations and a Root CA’s obligations with respect to subordinate CAs are set forth in Section 9.9 of the Baseline Requirements.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Public [<a href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org">mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ben Wilson via Public<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 6:37 PM<br><b>To:</b> Moudrick M. Dadashov <a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt"><md@ssc.lt></a>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org"><public@cabforum.org></a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Would this work?<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Notwithstanding the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to <u>not less than</u>: (1) one hundred thousand US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – per EV Certificate; and<u>/or</u> (2) five million US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the contrary.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Moudrick M. Dadashov [<a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt">mailto:md@ssc.lt</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:48 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <<a href="mailto:ben.wilson@digicert.com">ben.wilson@digicert.com</a>>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Cambria",serif">Would you mind to show how it would sound now? :)</span><br><br>Thanks,<br>M.D.<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 7/26/2017 2:14 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">And it should be an “and” or a “but”, but rephrased nevertheless.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3833in;height:.3041in" id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:image001.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Ben Wilson <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:11 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <a href="mailto:ben.wilson@digicert.com"><ben.wilson@digicert.com></a>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org"><public@cabforum.org></a>; Moudrick M. Dadashov <a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt"><md@ssc.lt></a><br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">Never mind – I think I now see your point. Not “up to” it needs to be “not less than $5 million.” Would that make it clearer?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3875in;height:.3in" id="_x0000_i1026" src="cid:image002.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Public [<a href="mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org">mailto:public-bounces@cabforum.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ben Wilson via Public<br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 5:10 PM<br><b>To:</b> Moudrick M. Dadashov <<a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt">md@ssc.lt</a>>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">It’s permissive – a CA MAY limit its liability. Maybe we should say “up to $5 million”. Then, would that be clearer - that it can be less than $5 million?</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3833in;height:.3041in" id="_x0000_i1027" src="cid:image003.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Moudrick M. Dadashov [<a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt">mailto:md@ssc.lt</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:35 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <<a href="mailto:ben.wilson@digicert.com">ben.wilson@digicert.com</a>>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <<a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org">public@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Cambria",serif">With "and" I don't see its optional.<br><br>Again, just to understand the model: is per EV certificate amount is NOT fixed whereas 12-month continuous amount is the only option ($5 mln.)?<br><br>Thanks,<br>M.D. </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 7/26/2017 1:28 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">All of the provisions would provide optional caps that CAs could place on EV liability. The 12-month $5 Million cap allows a CA to cap all EV liability to all those EV certificates issued within a single year. </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3875in;height:.3in" id="_x0000_i1028" src="cid:image004.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Moudrick M. Dadashov [<a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt">mailto:md@ssc.lt</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:24 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <a href="mailto:ben.wilson@digicert.com"><ben.wilson@digicert.com></a>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org"><public@cabforum.org></a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Cambria",serif">Ok. Do I understand the intention correctly: to have a "floating liability" amount per EV certificate and "fixed liability" amount per continuous 12-month period?<br><br>Thanks,<br>M.D.</span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 7/26/2017 1:10 AM, Ben Wilson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext">No. Because they MAY do both. An “or” would mean that they have to choose between the two, which isn’t the intent.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3833in;height:.3041in" id="_x0000_i1029" src="cid:image005.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"></span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:windowtext"> </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="color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="color:windowtext"> Moudrick M. Dadashov [<a href="mailto:md@ssc.lt">mailto:md@ssc.lt</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, July 25, 2017 4:09 PM<br><b>To:</b> Ben Wilson <a href="mailto:ben.wilson@digicert.com"><ben.wilson@digicert.com></a>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <a href="mailto:public@cabforum.org"><public@cabforum.org></a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Pre-Ballot 209 EV Liability</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Cambria",serif">Hi Ben,<br><br>could it be "or" between (1) and (2)?<br><br>Thanks,<br>M.D.</span><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 7/25/2017 11:59 PM, Ben Wilson via Public wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal">Here is another pre-ballot for discussion.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b>Ballot 209 - EV Liability</b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">In Section 18 of the EV Guidelines, add the following sentences to the end of the first paragraph:<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Notwithstanding the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to: (1) one hundred thousand US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – per EV Certificate; and (2) five million US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the contrary.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Such that Section 18 of the EV Guidelines would read:<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">CAs MAY limit their liability as described in Section 9.8 of the Baseline Requirements except that a CA MAY NOT limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to a monetary amount less than two thousand US dollars per Subscriber or Relying Party per EV Certificate. <u>Notwithstanding the foregoing, a CA MAY limit its liability to Subscribers or Relying Parties for legally recognized and provable claims to: (1) one hundred thousand US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – per EV Certificate; and (2) five million US dollars – aggregated across all claims, Subscribers, and Relying Parties – for all EV Certificates issued by the CA during any continuous 12-month period. These limitations are notwithstanding anything in the Baseline Requirements purportedly to the contrary</u>.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">A CA's indemnification obligations and a Root CA’s obligations with respect to subordinate CAs are set forth in Section 9.9 of the Baseline Requirements.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><b><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#0174C3">Ben Wilson, JD, CISA, CISSP</span></b><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">VP Compliance</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:2.0pt"><span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#686869">+1 801 701 9678</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><img border="0" width="133" height="29" style="width:1.3875in;height:.3in" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image006.jpg@01D34355.6D1F10F0"><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br><br><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Public mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="mailto:Public@cabforum.org">Public@cabforum.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public">https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public</a><o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>