<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)">
<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:DengXian;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@DengXian";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@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" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi Ben,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks for the simplification. I also think the ballot should address the EV Guidelines, which also uses both terms. Could you please review?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">From the CAB Forum point of view, I am concerned with this ballot, since I believe the Code Signing and S/MIME BRs use the current terms. This may put the requirements out of sync, which may impact CAs which issue different certificate
types. Hopefully the Code Signing and S/MIME working groups will also review and consider addressing these changes if the ballot passes.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We do need to address this type of issue in an overall set of requirements to address all certificate types.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks, Bruce.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces@cabforum.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ben Wilson via Servercert-wg<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 14, 2023 3:40 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg@cabforum.org><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] [Servercert-wg] SC-XXX: Modify Subscriber Agreement and Terms of Use<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-line-height-alt:.75pt"><span style="font-size:1.0pt;color:white">Hi, Dustin Hollenback and I are looking for another endorser for a proposed ballot - see https: //github. com/cabforum/servercert/compare/a0360b61e73476959220dc328e3b68d0224fa0b3. . 663695b8319c0cd32e0060bb9304ecd32e3737a1
It would remove the concept <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-line-height-alt:.75pt"><span style="font-size:1.0pt;color:white"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dustin Hollenback and I are looking for another endorser for a proposed ballot - see
<a href="https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/a0360b61e73476959220dc328e3b68d0224fa0b3..663695b8319c0cd32e0060bb9304ecd32e3737a1__;!!FJ-Y8qCqXTj2!ZAcANOKKYwiAsovlD5P6N_i4Z0CJbk1vKgNr0PVzTLCQVCIjFUx5W1pQXndGPggekLMBPDowQKSrxCn1zrGZH26L0LUsDA$">
https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/a0360b61e73476959220dc328e3b68d0224fa0b3..663695b8319c0cd32e0060bb9304ecd32e3737a1</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It would remove the concept of a separate "Terms of Use" and replace it with "Subscriber Agreement" and make several other changes with respect to "Subscriber Agreements".<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Is anyone interested in endorsing?<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>
</div>
<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>
</body>
</html>