<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:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
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="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We would support this if a Microsoft representative publicly makes a statement clarifying that their OCSP requirements in Microsoft policy are not intended to apply to non-TLS certificates and/or updates their policy to state the same.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would encourage them to do so because I personally believe that is in fact the original intent of the policy, but the problem is that our compliance team (and other compliance teams…) cannot rely upon my personal beliefs.<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:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Smcwg-public <smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Smcwg-public<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, September 23, 2022 1:53 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> smcwg-public@cabforum.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [Smcwg-public] OCSP URLs in S/MIME Certificates<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
I dug up some emails HARICA exchanged with Microsoft Root Program Managers back in June 2021. We indicated that the Root Store Policy at-that-time had a "catch-all" phrase implying that OCSP URLs must be included in all Certificates trusted by Microsoft.<br>
<br>
After it was pointed out by a Microsoft representative that it is not required for Code Signing Certificates, we reached out to Microsoft asking what is the case for other types of certificates. Their response was:<br>
<br>
<span style="color:#1F497D">"Removing the OCSP URLs from non-TLS certificates is acceptable."</span><br>
<br>
I know this is not a "normative statement" but for me it confirms that OCSP is not required for S/MIME Certificates in the Microsoft Root Program. So, unless there is an opposing statement by Microsoft, I hope we can agree to change the OCSP requirement from
mandatory to optional in the first version of the SMBRs.<br>
<br>
Thank you,<br>
Dimitris.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>