<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-8859-7">
<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:Aptos;}
/* 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;}
span.E-MailFormatvorlage18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt;}
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="DE" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Hello Dimitris,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">the GLEIF has developed the concept of a “Verifiable Legal Identifier”, the qvLEI are issued by a trusted network of “qualified” vLEI
Issuers.<br>
That seems to be an interesting and important new topic in the field of organizational identities/OV based on LEI<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">We can ask the GLEIF CEO Stepan Worl for a lecture, let me know if I should ask him (like in 2017)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Best regards<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:EN-US">Arno<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",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">Von:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Public <public-bounces@cabforum.org>
<b>Im Auftrag von </b>Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public<br>
<b>Gesendet:</b> Dienstag, 14. Mai 2024 17:28<br>
<b>An:</b> Ben Wilson <bwilson@mozilla.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org><br>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [cabfpub] Bergamo F2F Agenda Item<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 14/5/2024 6:08 ì.ì., Ben Wilson wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Dimitris, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">There appears to be an open slot on the F2F agenda - Wed. May 29th at 9:05 a.m. I was thinking we could use that time to discuss revocation timelines and balancing the security provided by revocation with the security/stability needed
to support critical infrastructure. In other words, we could discuss BR section 4.9.1 and concerns about disruption of global/national operations in banking/finance, transportation, government, telecommunications, healthcare, and other key areas where certificate
revocation might cause key systems to fail.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Should I put this topic in that open slot on the wiki?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ben<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
Hi Ben,<br>
<br>
I think that would be great. I assume you will be leading this session.<br>
<br>
I think it's a great opportunity for CAs with past experience on delayed revocations to share some insight about specific challenges in the sectors you listed, and possibly add some that are missing.<br>
<br>
FYI, public evidence for delayed revocation incidents (open and closed, based on specific tags) is available in
<a href="https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?f1=OP&f4=CP&v2=ca-compliance&f2=status_whiteboard&o2=allwordssubstr&component=CA%20Certificate%20Compliance&query_format=advanced&list_id=17029100&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&v3=delayed-revocation%20leaf-revocation-delay&resolution=---&resolution=FIXED&resolution=INVALID&resolution=WONTFIX&resolution=DUPLICATE&resolution=WORKSFORME&o3=anywordssubstr&f3=status_whiteboard">
this link</a>.<br>
<br>
Although you mentioned that this affects the BR section 4.9.1, this topic affects all Working Groups because all the WG BRs have a section 4.9.1 that is pretty much similar with the TLS BRs. With that said, I would like to ask if Members have any objections
for discussing this topic as part of the Forum plenary.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
Dimitris<br>
CA/B Forum Chair<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>