[cabfpub] Proposed motion to modify EV domain verification section

Jeremy Rowley jeremy.rowley at digicert.com
Wed May 15 13:45:34 UTC 2013

No one is advocating removing the “control” or “right to use” requirement (11.6.2(2)).  We are talking about removing the additional “knowledge” requirement since it is somewhat redundant with the “authority” requirement under Section 11.7 and 11.8.  Since the applicant has already requested a cert and the CA has verified the contract signer’s, certificate requester, and certificate approver’s authority in relation to the certificate, requiring an additional knowledge check doesn’t add any additional assurances, especially since the checks under Section 11.6.2(3) are the exact same checks as specified under Section 11.6.2(2).




From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of i-barreira at izenpe.net
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 1:54 AM
To: eddy_nigg at startcom.org; public at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Proposed motion to modify EV domain verification section


I agree with Eddy. What would mean then “extended”? Maybe a rewording of the “exclusive right to use” is enough but I wouldn´t go further than that, we have to be sure that it has the “control” or “the right to use” or whatever needed, but don´t remove that control



Iñigo Barreira
Responsable del Área técnica
 <mailto:i-barreira at izenpe.net> i-barreira at izenpe.net



Descripción: cid:image001.png at 01CE3152.B4804EB0

ERNE! Baliteke mezu honen zatiren bat edo mezu osoa legez babestuta egotea. Mezua badu bere hartzailea. Okerreko helbidera heldu bada (helbidea gaizki idatzi, transmisioak huts egin) eman abisu igorleari, korreo honi erantzuna. KONTUZ!
ATENCION! Este mensaje contiene informacion privilegiada o confidencial a la que solo tiene derecho a acceder el destinatario. Si usted lo recibe por error le agradeceriamos que no hiciera uso de la informacion y que se pusiese en contacto con el remitente.


De: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] En nombre de Eddy Nigg (StartCom Ltd.)
Enviado el: miércoles, 15 de mayo de 2013 9:47
Para: public at cabforum.org
Asunto: Re: [cabfpub] Proposed motion to modify EV domain verification section


On 05/15/2013 02:57 AM, From Jeremy Rowley: 

name verification should really be completely separate from obligations
surrounding use of a certificate and verification of the certificate

For years the exclusive right and proper authorization was part of the landscape of EV. If this proposal would be adopted we probably will abandon non-EV organization validated certificates and move them all over to EV (for the better or worse). But then we probably should remove the "Extended" from "Extended Validation" because it clearly wouldn't be that anymore. :-)




Eddy Nigg, COO/CTO


StartCom Ltd. <http://www.startcom.org> 


startcom at startcom.org


Join the Revolution! <http://blog.startcom.org> 


Follow Me <http://twitter.com/eddy_nigg> 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130515/3ba32484/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 19121 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20130515/3ba32484/attachment-0003.png>

More information about the Public mailing list