<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:inherit;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle21
{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:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:180164653;
mso-list-template-ids:920392536;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:305862698;
mso-list-template-ids:1627577818;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:417604305;
mso-list-template-ids:-445371974;}
@list l2:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l2:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:834419082;
mso-list-template-ids:1779313864;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l3:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:892236743;
mso-list-template-ids:-275086592;}
@list l4:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l4:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5
{mso-list-id:1611399749;
mso-list-template-ids:-1679262558;}
@list l5:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:36.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level2
{mso-level-tab-stop:72.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level3
{mso-level-tab-stop:108.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:144.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level5
{mso-level-tab-stop:180.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level6
{mso-level-tab-stop:216.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:252.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level8
{mso-level-tab-stop:288.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l5:level9
{mso-level-tab-stop:324.0pt;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-18.0pt;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></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-SE link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Chris, All,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I was reading through the minutes of the last meeting to see why the references were removed since I was unable to attend.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>While I do understand the reasoning, I would recommend adding a reference in the language, pointing to the correct section of the website that is actually listing the tools. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>It looks like we’re already planning to make it more clear on the website that these tools belong to this requirement. However, I expect most CA’s and other parties wanting to comply with BR requirement to read and investigate the BRs, not the Tools page on the CA/B website. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Therefore I’d like to suggest adding the following sentence before the Motion Ends line in your proposal:</span><span lang=EN-US> “A non-exhausting list of tools and resources capable of assisting to comply with these requirements can be found at <a href="https://cabforum.org/resources/tools/">https://cabforum.org/resources/tools/</a>”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US>Martijn<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=en-SE style='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 lang=EN-US>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US> Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Chris Kemmerer via Servercert-wg<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, 25 July 2022 18:19<br><b>To:</b> Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek@digicert.com>; Aaron Gable <aaron@letsencrypt.org>; CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg@cabforum.org><br><b>Cc:</b> Hanno Böck <hanno@hboeck.de><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Servercert-wg] SCXX Ballot - Debian Weak Keys (and related vulnerabilities)<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div style='border:solid black 1.0pt;padding:2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt 2.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal 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.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Based on discussion in the SCWG call of July 21 2022, we are 1) removing the language directing readers to external "suggested tools" and 2) seeking endorsers.<br><br>Many thanks to all for the useful input. <br><br>Chris K<br><br>=====<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>--- Motion Begins ---<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>This ballot is intended to clarify CA responsibilities regarding weak key vulnerabilities (including specific guidance for Debian weak key, ROCA and Fermat attack vulnerabilities) and modifies the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-Trusted Certificates” as follows, based on Version 1.8.4:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>Proposed ballot language:</b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>4.9.1.1 Reasons for Revoking a Subscriber Certificate<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>Replace:</b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>4. The CA is made aware of a demonstrated or proven method that can easily compute the Subscriber’s Private Key based on the Public Key in the Certificate (such as a Debian weak key, see <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.debian.org%2FSSLkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075534002%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2hjyo2PcEKLZFcAcCW%2FmQ7llWWXCNPhYISm2uF3zEIE%3D&reserved=0">https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys</a>)<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>With:</b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>4. The CA is made aware of a demonstrated or proven method that can easily compute the Subscriber’s Private Key (such as those identified in 6.1.1.3(4)).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>---<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>6.1.1.3. Subscriber Key Pair Generation<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>Replace:</b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The CA SHALL reject a certificate request if one or more of the following conditions are met:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>1. The Key Pair does not meet the requirements set forth in Section 6.1.5 and/or Section 6.1.6;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>2. There is clear evidence that the specific method used to generate the Private Key was flawed;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>3. The CA is aware of a demonstrated or proven method that exposes the Applicant's Private Key to compromise;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>4. The CA has previously been made aware that the Applicant's Private Key has suffered a Key Compromise, such as through the provisions of Section 4.9.1.1;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>5. The CA is aware of a demonstrated or proven method to easily compute the Applicant's Private Key based on the Public Key (such as a Debian weak key, see <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.debian.org%2FSSLkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075534002%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2hjyo2PcEKLZFcAcCW%2FmQ7llWWXCNPhYISm2uF3zEIE%3D&reserved=0">https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys</a>).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b>With:</b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The CA SHALL reject a certificate request if one or more of the following occurs:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>1) The requested Public Key does not meet the requirements set forth in Sections 6.1.5 and/or 6.1.6;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>2) The CA is aware of a demonstrated or proven method that exposes the Subscriber's Private Key to compromise;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>3) The CA has previously been made aware that the Subscriber's Private Key has suffered a Key Compromise, such as through the provisions of Section 4.9.1.1;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>4) The Public Key corresponds to an industry demonstrated weak Private Key, in particular:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>a) In the case of ROCA vulnerability, the CA SHALL reject keys identified by the tools available at <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcrocs-muni%2Froca&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075534002%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=W1Pxb77B2WKbKkM92SO5382czGJ8ou04JKiQ0LEGaz0%3D&reserved=0">https://github.com/crocs-muni/roca</a> or equivalent.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>b) In the case of Debian weak keys (<a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.debian.org%2FSSLkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075534002%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2hjyo2PcEKLZFcAcCW%2FmQ7llWWXCNPhYISm2uF3zEIE%3D&reserved=0">https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys</a>), the CA SHALL reject at least keys generated by the flawed OpenSSL version with the combination of the following parameters:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>i) Big-endian 32-bit, little-endian 32-bit, and little-endian 64-bit architecture;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>ii) Process ID of 0 to 32767, inclusive;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>iii) All RSA Public Key lengths supported by the CA up to and including 4096 bits;<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>iv) rnd, nornd, and noreadrnd OpenSSL random file state.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>c) In the case of Close Primes vulnerability, the CA SHALL reject weak keys identified within 100 rounds using Fermat’s factorization method<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>For Debian weak keys not covered above, the CA SHALL take actions to minimize the probability of certificate issuance.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>CAs MUST check for Debian weak keys for all RSA modulus lengths and exponents that they accept.<span lang=EN-US><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>--- Motion Ends ---<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><br>=====<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 7/13/2022 3:51 PM, Tim Hollebeek wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal>I agree with the strategy of stating the requirements and then using requirements-free language to reference the ancillary resources, but a lowercased 2119 word is still a 2119 word (“These words are *often* capitalized” – RFC 2119, emphasis mine).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>It’s best to rephrase non-requirements to avoid MUST, SHALL, SHOULD, and MAY entirely. As well as required, recommended, and optional <span style='font-family:"Segoe UI Emoji",sans-serif'>😊</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Something like: “CAs might find these tools useful”, or even something like: “Additional information is available from these resources.”<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Referencing something does not in any way imply it is free from errors or even that it can be used in a BR-compliant way. I give you the BR reference to the original RFC 6844 as an example. The original RFC 6844 had multiple errors and was rather incompatible with the BRs, but got added to the BRs anyway. Oops.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>We should make sure the resources we reference are high enough quality to be useful, but I think the standard ballot / discussion process can handle that.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>-Tim<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b>From:</b> Servercert-wg <a href="mailto:servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org"><servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org></a> <b>On Behalf Of </b>Aaron Gable via Servercert-wg<br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 8, 2022 12:44 PM<br><b>To:</b> Chris Kemmerer <a href="mailto:chris@ssl.com"><chris@ssl.com></a>; CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <a href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org"><servercert-wg@cabforum.org></a><br><b>Cc:</b> Hanno Böck <a href="mailto:hanno@hboeck.de"><hanno@hboeck.de></a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Servercert-wg] SCXX Ballot - Debian Weak Keys (and related vulnerabilities)<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>It seems to me like the appropriate line to walk would be:<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>First, state the requirements (such as blocking debian weak keys, or blocking ROCA keys) in plain language, much as the current ballot does. This makes the requirement that CAs must abide by clear.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Second, provide links to tools that may be helpful. Do not preface these links with any normative language, i.e. say "CAs may find these tools useful: ...", not "CAs MAY use these tools: ...". This serves the purpose of providing easy access to the helpful external resources, but without stating that their contents have been vetted and fully approved.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Does that makes sense?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Aaron<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 12:13 PM Chris Kemmerer via Servercert-wg <<a href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org">servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>INTRO</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Thanks to all who participated in the very useful discussion regarding this proposed ballot in our June 23 2022 call.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>An important point was raised about how to handle external links to recommended (but not required) resources. In "Section 6.1.1.3. Subscriber Key Pair Generation" of the proposed language, we require CAs to reject requests for certificates with "industry demonstrated weak Private Keys" (as "SHALL" and "MUST" directives), then provide links to "Suggested tools that CAs MAY use" to judge requests.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>THE QUESTIONS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>The questions here are:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>If we direct issuers to external resources in CABF documents, what level of CABF-level vetting should be required or expected for those links?</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>And</span><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:inherit'> is the ballot process itself sufficient vetting for such links?</span></b><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>OUR ASSUMPTION AND EXISTING LINKS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>We are assuming that for, weak key detection, we DO want to provide useful links to help guide certificate issuers (see sidebar below). Note that the current BR language already includes one such link, to a page maintained by Debian (<a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.debian.org%2FSSLkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075534002%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2hjyo2PcEKLZFcAcCW%2FmQ7llWWXCNPhYISm2uF3zEIE%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys</a>), though with a vetted status unknown to us. </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Our proposed ballot language also adds a requirement to reject keys "identified by the tools available at <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcrocs-muni%2Froca&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=MrPVgvf4CvjHpdhGnh%2BcP7P%2BUxkJ%2B20RQPoabQm4dw8%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/crocs-muni/roca</a> or equivalent". As we recall it, this resource was suggested by a CABF participant now departed, and again the status of vetting for this link is unknown.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>For what it's worth, a quick scan of the BRs shows that, apart from weak key guidance, we do include links to other external resources which are presumably foundational enough to not require vetting. These include:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>IETF (various RFCs, ex. <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftools.ietf.org%2Fhtml%2Frfc5890&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Lbo28F8%2Fx2d306fLSud0u3LiWuVGOphIK6zeo6Ftel0%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5890</a>)</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>IANA (registry information, ex. <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iana.org%2Fassignments%2Fiana-ipv4-special-registry%2Fiana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Hz3bMVZMFmBQesBrtTXYnSjnndcY8Mc8xgujEgOr81c%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml</a>)</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>NIST (publications, ex. <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcsrc.nist.gov%2Fpublications%2Fnistpubs%2F800-89%2FSP-800-89_November2006.pdf&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zpIHS6JVHP8wgHQ%2FlwbgWODg8fKH6EFNT2HpMendpyA%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-89/SP-800-89_November2006.pdf</a>)</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>and the Mozilla Foundation (the Public Suffix List, <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpublicsuffix.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Rue2szur3TchDXxc8WW5nnxkf3TCUeffsXVzooucBac%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://publicsuffix.org/</a>).</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>"CROSS-VETTING" OF PROPOSED RESOURCES</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>As Dimitris stated in the call, the two other links included as resources which MAY be utilized:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FCVE-2008-0166&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=bYbObWp1PySlrvcwGeFfqIKnZRarfMJKiE83abTe8yg%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/CVE-2008-0166</a></span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo3'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FHARICA-official%2Fdebian-weak-keys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zao1ch6I8qObN46RWPrSG9yySNsfMvSSjJ00MLSfh50%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/HARICA-official/debian-weak-keys</a></span><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>... have been "cross-vetted" by their respective providers (HARICA and Sectigo).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>This discussion was spurred by a suggestion from Adriano Santoni to consider adding a third resource (Hanno Böck's badkeys tool):</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fbadkeys%2Fbadkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=m4eFeqTReq6FPJN%2BeOai2uSa8WlPyHOBxftn9Nvw5%2BU%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/badkeys/badkeys</a> (web version: <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbadkeys.info%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=sONo3h0BzG79pbUMdTFEBXYpUUoeie%2BBIuG7P2HiYe4%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://badkeys.info/</a>)</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>...for which no such CABF-level "cross-vetting" has been performed (as far as we know).</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>We ourselves very much appreciate the effort that went into creating these tools and intend to utilize them. However:</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>TO RESTATE THE QUESTIONS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo5'><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Is the ballot process itself considered adequate vetting for external links in CABF documents?</span></b><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo5'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>If not, <b>what vetting would we consider adequate?</b></span><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>SIDEBAR: OTHER OPTIONS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><ol start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>In the June 23 call, an external, CABF-supported resource (i.e. a separate web page with appropriate links) was considered, discussed, and rejected as likely to increase overhead and decrease reliability. Based on this, our sense is that <b>any links deemed useful should indeed be included in the actual ballot language itself</b>.</span><o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6'><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>And finally, as raised in previous discussions: <b>Would some sort of disclaimer be appropriate for external links</b>, and if so should it extend beyond the 6.1.1.3 links to cover external resources more generally?</span><o:p></o:p></li></ol></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>CLOSING REMARKS</span></b><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> </span><o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Thanks.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><hr size=2 width="98%" align=center></div><div id="gmail-m_8952578848581799150divRplyFwdMsg"><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='color:black'> Servercert-wg <<a href="mailto:servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org" target="_blank">servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org</a>> on behalf of Adriano Santoni via Servercert-wg <<a href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org" target="_blank">servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, June 12, 2022 7:11 PM<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org" target="_blank">servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a> <<a href="mailto:servercert-wg@cabforum.org" target="_blank">servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a>><br><b>Cc:</b> Hanno Böck <<a href="mailto:hanno@hboeck.de" target="_blank">hanno@hboeck.de</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Servercert-wg] SCXX Ballot - Debian Weak Keys (and related vulnerabilities)</span> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p>Might a third option be the tool developed by Hanno Boeck?<o:p></o:p></p><p><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fbadkeys%2Fbadkeys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=m4eFeqTReq6FPJN%2BeOai2uSa8WlPyHOBxftn9Nvw5%2BU%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/badkeys/badkeys</a><o:p></o:p></p><p>From our point of view it's an effective tool.<o:p></o:p></p><p>Adriano<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>Il 09/06/2022 15:18, Chris Kemmerer via Servercert-wg ha scritto:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>Suggested tools that CAs MAY use to obtain lists of Debian weak keys include:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> - <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FCVE-2008-0166&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=bYbObWp1PySlrvcwGeFfqIKnZRarfMJKiE83abTe8yg%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/CVE-2008-0166</a> provides a generator, for the complete set of parameters listed above, that runs on any modern 64-bit Linux system; it also provides complete sets of pregenerated keys for the most common RSA key sizes.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> - <a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FHARICA-official%2Fdebian-weak-keys&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zao1ch6I8qObN46RWPrSG9yySNsfMvSSjJ00MLSfh50%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://github.com/HARICA-official/debian-weak-keys</a> provides a generator, for a subset of the parameters listed above, that can take advantage of a computer cluster.<o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote></div></div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________________________________<br>Servercert-wg mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Servercert-wg@cabforum.org" target="_blank">Servercert-wg@cabforum.org</a><br><a href="https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.cabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fservercert-wg&data=05%7C01%7Cmartijn.katerbarg%40sectigo.com%7C70d815a3cc924bf1521f08da6e596262%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637943629075690223%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=EB6%2FDIQzZhpDbJobRVn2dHqskn7r5yIKfZmoMoS%2BKfc%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg</a><o:p></o:p></p></blockquote></div></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>