[cabfpub] Recent ITU-T meeting

[Phillip]

See the Report on Question 11/17 Documents considered, it is the second in the list, source Iran Republic of.
On Apr 26, 2013, at 12:52 PM, tScheme Technical Manager wrote:

> Hi Phillip,
> 
> Where is that C0010 document referenced and how does it relate to the
> proposal?
> 
> Cheers
> Richard
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
> Behalf Of Phillip
> Sent: 26 April 2013 17:43
> To: tScheme Technical Manager
> Cc: public at cabforum.org
> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Recent ITU-T meeting
> 
> 
> On Apr 26, 2013, at 12:35 PM, tScheme Technical Manager wrote:
> 
>> Hi Ben,
>> 
>> I have already been involved in some discussions on what has become TD 131
>> and I'm not sure that it's useful to think of the auditors as fulfilling
> the
>> role of "juridical experts" (although they could also decide to offer that
>> service). My simplistic understanding is that I as a relying party would
>> formally contract with a JE service and then, whenever I receive a
>> Certificate (e.g. an SSL certificate when I log on to an e-Commerce site),
> I
>> would send a copy of the certificate to my JE service and ask them whether
> I
>> should trust it or not - i.e. I do not rely on the Browser making that
>> decision for me.
> 
> That is the omnibroker model.
> 
> It makes great sense, unless of course you choose the wrong juridical
> expert.
> 
> Is the document C0010 Rev.1 'Generic Tools to support secure applications'
> available? Given the source of the proposal it would seem useful to take a
> look.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> At least that's how I read it!
>> 
>> Regards
>> Richard
>> ------------------------------------
>> Richard Trevorah
>> Technical Manager
>> tScheme Limited
>> 
>> M: +44 (0) 781 809 4728
>> F: +44 (0) 870 005 6311
>> 
>> http://www.tscheme.org
>> ------------------------------------
>> 
>> The information in this message and, if present, any attachments are
>> intended solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). The
>> content of this e-mail and its attachments is confidential and may be
>> legally privileged. Unless otherwise stated, any use or disclosure is
>> unauthorised and may be unlawful. 
>> 
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the message and any
>> attachments and notify the sender as soon as practicable
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
>> Behalf Of Ben Wilson
>> Sent: 26 April 2013 16:59
>> To: public at cabforum.org
>> Subject: [cabfpub] Recent ITU-T meeting
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> These are from Tony Rutkowski.  Let's discuss them on the list and then
>> during next week's telephone call.  
>> 
>> TD 131 seems to add a new PKI "juridical expert", which might already
> exist
>> in the form of WebTrust/ETSI auditors.  However, I'm not sure, and there
> may
>> be other changes that have not had full peer review.  
>> 
>> Also attached is the Q11/17 Report with some actions highlighted in
> yellow,
>> as well as proposed changes to X.509.  See TDs 43 and 241.
>> 
>> Please review and let's discuss.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Ben
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Public mailing list
>> Public at cabforum.org
>> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
>