<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p><font face="Calibri">Hi Christophe,</font></p>
    <p><font face="Calibri">frankly, it seems obvious to me that an
        email address is not, generally speaking, an individual
        attribute. </font><font face="Calibri">Would you argue that
        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@example.com">info@example.com</a> is a </font><font face="Calibri">natural
        person</font><font face="Calibri">'s attribute? It may be so in
        specific cases (for example when it is of the type
        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:givenname.surname@example.com">givenname.surname@example.com</a> and the email service provider
        applies a rule that ensures proper attribution to users and
        disambiguation of similar names), but it certainly is not so by
        definition. </font></p>
    <p><font face="Calibri">Evidently a natural person (or more likely
        more than one) can have access to the mailbox at an address like
        <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@example.com">info@example.com</a>, but it is evident that such address is not
        specific to any particular natural person in the same sense and
        in the same way in which givenname and surname are attributes of
        a natural person.</font></p>
    <font face="Calibri">And no, no intent at all to modify the SV
      profile; quite the opposite: to respect its definition even in the
      legacy case (where among other things, the needs of niche use
      cases can very well be satisfied by OV certificates).</font><br>
    <p><font face="Calibri">Adriano</font></p>
    <p><font face="Calibri"><br>
      </font></p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Il 24/10/2023 09:25, Christophe Bonjean
      ha scritto:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:PSAPR03MB571786660F698C69B53DF626E5DFA@PSAPR03MB5717.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <meta name="Generator"
        content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
      <style>@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:Consolas;
        panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
        {margin:0cm;
        font-size:10.0pt;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        color:blue;
        text-decoration:underline;}code
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        font-family:"Courier New";}pre
        {mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
        margin:0cm;
        font-size:10.0pt;
        font-family:"Courier New";}span.HTMLPreformattedChar
        {mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
        mso-style-priority:99;
        mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
        font-family:Consolas;}span.EmailStyle22
        {mso-style-type:personal;
        font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;}span.EmailStyle23
        {mso-style-type:personal-reply;
        font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;
        color:windowtext;
        font-weight:normal;
        font-style:normal;}.MsoChpDefault
        {mso-style-type:export-only;
        font-size:10.0pt;
        mso-ligatures:none;}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]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Hi Adriano,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">From your
            proposed change, it seems that you are not considering a
            mailbox address as an individual (natural person) attribute?
            Could you provide some context on that?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">We should
            also keep in mind the initial purpose of the legacy profile.
            Even though the suggestion of using an OV profile for
            CN=email, O=Company might be sensible, we’re still
            fundamentally modifying the legacy SV profile.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
            style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Christophe<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">From:</span></b><span
                style="font-size:11.0pt"> Smcwg-public
                <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org"><smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org></a> <b>On Behalf
                  Of </b>Adriano Santoni via Smcwg-public<br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 20, 2023 10:33 AM<br>
                <b>To:</b> Ashish Dhiman
                <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com"><ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com></a>; SMIME Certificate
                Working Group <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:smcwg-public@cabforum.org"><smcwg-public@cabforum.org></a>; Martijn
                Katerbarg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com"><martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com></a><br>
                <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Smcwg-public] [External Sender] RE:
                Re: Re: Re: SV certificates devoid of individual
                attributes<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <p>Ashish,<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p>my intent would not be to prohibit anything, but rather to
          make two types of certificates (OV, SV) distinguishable that
          otherwise are not, and to make the S/MIME baseline
          requirements consistent with the definition of
          Sponsor-Validated.<br>
          <br>
          Furthermore, I don't understand why what I'm proposing could
          cause problems for those who need, for their legacy use case,
          S/MIME certificates that simultaneously contain
          Subject.organizationName AND <i>any type </i>of email
          address in the Subject.commonName (like <a
            href="mailto:department@example.com" moz-do-not-send="true"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">department@example.com</a> or
          <a href="mailto:ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com"
            moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com</a>
          to quote your examples), plus of course locality and
          organizationIdentifier. In fact, in such use case you can very
          well use OV-type S/MIME certificates. Don't you?<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p>Adriano<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p><o:p> </o:p></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">Il 20/10/2023 10:20, Ashish Dhiman ha
            scritto:<o:p></o:p></p>
        </div>
        <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
          <div align="center">
            <table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width:30.0%"
              width="30%" cellpadding="0" border="1">
              <tbody>
                <tr>
                  <td
style="background:yellow;padding:1.5pt 1.5pt 1.5pt 1.5pt" valign="top">
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                        style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">NOTICE:</span><span
                        style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black"> Pay
                        attention - external email - Sender is <a
                          href="mailto:ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com"
                          moz-do-not-send="true"
                          class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com</a>
                      </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
                  </td>
                </tr>
              </tbody>
            </table>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center" align="center"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
            style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt">Respected: CA/B – S/MIME Forum
              Members.  </span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
            style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt">I feel the problem that we are
              trying to solve by prohibiting email address from CN in
              Legacy will only make things complex rather than solve it.
              During our discussion, the intent for legacy, always was
              to have minimum impact on existing practices and give time
              for wider industry to move to multipurpose or strict
              profile. I feel, we are defeating the whole purpose of
              legacy with suggested change, as I am trying to understand
              how; eliminating email address from CN will help us
              differentiate a sponsor profile from organization profile.
              As, Technically, people can still use <a
                href="mailto:department@example.com" target="_blank"
                title="mailto:department@example.com"
                moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">department@example.com</a>
              in sponsor profile as email address and also use <a
                href="mailto:ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com"
                target="_blank"
                title="mailto:ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com"
                moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ashish.dhiman@globalsign.com</a>
              in Organization Profile as email address.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
            style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt">On the other hand, this change
              will also deviate from current practices for CN use for
              legacy use cases Also, during implementation, we see in
              most of the cases; email address used in Sponsor profiles
              are correct. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
            style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt">I think removing email in CN
              makes legacy no longer like legacy and seems to make it
              stricter than multi and strict where its allowed. There is
              also no indication that the intent for changes, will be
              achieved without mandatory use of Given Name and Sur Name
              in Legacy profile, which is again a big change considering
              legacy intent, and make these profiles similar to multi
              and strict version. Overall, this change seems to defeat
              its goal of supporting wider ecosystem for a while. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"
            style="mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto"><span
              style="font-size:11.0pt">Ashish</span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></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">From:</span></b>
                <span style="font-size:11.0pt">Smcwg-public <a
                    href="mailto:smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org"
                    moz-do-not-send="true"><smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org></a>
                  <b>On Behalf Of</b> Adriano Santoni via Smcwg-public<br>
                  <b>Sent:</b> Thursday, October 19, 2023 5:00 PM<br>
                  <b>To:</b> Martijn Katerbarg <a
                    href="mailto:martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com"
                    moz-do-not-send="true"><martijn.katerbarg@sectigo.com></a>;
                  SMIME Certificate Working Group <a
                    href="mailto:smcwg-public@cabforum.org"
                    moz-do-not-send="true"><smcwg-public@cabforum.org></a><br>
                  <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Smcwg-public] [External Sender]
                  Re: Re: Re: SV certificates devoid of individual
                  attributes</span><o:p></o:p></p>
            </div>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
          <p>I have created the pull request below. <o:p></o:p></p>
          <p><a href="https://github.com/cabforum/smime/pull/218"
              moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://github.com/cabforum/smime/pull/218</a><o:p></o:p></p>
          <p>Even if there exists some niche legacy uses cases, I
            believe it would be highly preferable to avoid allowing SV
            certificates that do not match the SV definition and are
            indistinguishable from OV certs. Besides, it appears that in
            such particular contexts OV certificates would still meet
            the need.<o:p></o:p></p>
          <p>Looking for endorsers.<o:p></o:p></p>
          <p>Adriano<o:p></o:p></p>
          <p> <o:p></o:p></p>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal">Il 16/10/2023 18:38, Martijn Katerbarg
              ha scritto:<o:p></o:p></p>
          </div>
          <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Happy to
                work with you on that. I do wonder what the cause and
                original intent behind this was.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I wonder
                if they key lies in the Note added to section 7.1.4.2.5:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">“</span>Legacy
              Generation profiles MAY omit the <code>subject:givenName</code>,
              <code>subject:surname</code>, and <code>subject:pseudonym</code>
              attributes and include only the <code>subject:commonName</code>
              as described in <a
href="https://github.com/cabforum/smime/blob/main/SBR.md#71422-subject-distinguished-name-fields"
                moz-do-not-send="true">Section 7.1.4.2.2(a)</a>.”<o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Could it
                be that the original intent here was that
                subject:givenName, subject:surname and subject:pseudonym
                are allowed to be left out, <b>only</b> if
                subject:commonName was included <b>and</b> had either
                the pseudonym or givenName+surname in it? <br>
                <br>
                <br>
                <br>
              </span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">I could
                see that as a possible legacy use case, with the intend
                to deprecate. I’m not sure if any CA needs that use case
                at current though.<br>
                <br>
                Regards,<br>
                <br>
                Martijn</span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
            <div id="mail-editor-reference-message-container">
              <div>
                <div
style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
                  <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span
                        style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:</span></b>
                    <span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Smcwg-public
                      <a href="mailto:smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org"
                        moz-do-not-send="true"><smcwg-public-bounces@cabforum.org></a>
                      on behalf of Adriano Santoni via Smcwg-public <a
                        href="mailto:smcwg-public@cabforum.org"
                        moz-do-not-send="true"><smcwg-public@cabforum.org></a><br>
                      <b>Date:</b> Monday, 16 October 2023 at 18:09<br>
                      <b>To:</b> <a
                        href="mailto:smcwg-public@cabforum.org"
                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                        class="moz-txt-link-freetext">smcwg-public@cabforum.org</a>
                      <a href="mailto:smcwg-public@cabforum.org"
                        moz-do-not-send="true"><smcwg-public@cabforum.org></a><br>
                      <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Smcwg-public] [External
                      Sender] Re: Re: SV certificates devoid of
                      individual attributes</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <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="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.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                <div>
                  <p>I would suggest an amendment in order to correct
                    this unintended result; I'm available to dratf a
                    proposal it if there are any endorsers.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  <p>Adriano<o:p></o:p></p>
                  <p> <o:p></o:p></p>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Il
                        16/10/2023 17:17, Dimitris Zacharopoulos via
                        Smcwg-public ha scritto:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote
                    style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
                    <div align="center">
                      <table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width:30.0%"
                        width="30%" cellspacing="3" cellpadding="0"
                        border="1">
                        <tbody>
                          <tr>
                            <td
style="background:yellow;padding:1.5pt 1.5pt 1.5pt 1.5pt" valign="top">
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><span
                                  style="font-size:11.0pt;color:red">NOTICE:</span><span
                                  style="color:black"> </span><span
                                  style="font-size:11.0pt;color:black">Pay
                                  attention - external email - Sender is
                                  <a
href="mailto:0100018b3910b1a1-5f63e11d-cb86-4599-8385-07abf817d4d1-000000@amazonses.com"
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    class="moz-txt-link-freetext">0100018b3910b1a1-5f63e11d-cb86-4599-8385-07abf817d4d1-000000@amazonses.com</a></span><span
                                  style="color:black"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                            </td>
                          </tr>
                        </tbody>
                      </table>
                    </div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
                      align="center"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                    <div>
                      <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">I
                          agree it's not a good thing. The SV profile
                          was to support certificates that include
                          attributes of individuals validated by the
                          Enterprise RA. If we allow those to be
                          missing, making it effectively an OV
                          Certificate, seems like an unintended result.<br>
                          <br>
                          Best regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p>
                    </div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><br>
                        <br>
                        <br>
                        <br>
                      </span><o:p></o:p></p>
                    <pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
                    <pre>Smcwg-public mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
                    <pre><a href="mailto:Smcwg-public@cabforum.org"
                    moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Smcwg-public@cabforum.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
                    <pre><a
href="https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/smcwg-public"
                    moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/smcwg-public</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </blockquote>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>