[cabfpub] CAB Forum Document Versioning

Rich Smith richard.smith at comodo.com
Mon Feb 4 17:27:11 UTC 2013

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gervase Markham [mailto:gerv at mozilla.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:02 AM
> I agree. There are various dates:
> 1) Standard adoption date - when a particular version of the standard
>    is finalized
> 2) Effective date - the date which CAB Forum recommends to browsers
>    that they choose as their "actual effective date" (see below)
> 3) Actual effective date (root program specific) - the date by which
>    root programs decide to require compliance to the standard
> 4) Audit standards publication date - the date a new version of the
>    audit standards are issued
> 5) Actual effective audit date (root program specific) - the date after
>    which root programs require use of the new audit standards
> [3) and 5) are not the same; Mozilla has required adherence to the BRs
> before the audit standards have arrived, acknowledging that there are
> _some_ things in there that we have no good way of checking.]
> 1) and 2) are up to the CAB Forum
> 3) and 5) are up to each individual root program
> 4) is up to the audit standards groups
> Each date is useful.
> Gerv

[RWS] The above being the case, IMO the CA/B Forum SHOULD only deal with #1. 
In absence of any control over 3-5 #2 only serves to muddy the waters.  We 
should adopt and leave it to the browsers and auditors to tell CAs when they 
MUST comply.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 6391 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130204/3ee118ed/attachment-0002.bin>

More information about the Public mailing list