[cabfpub] Breach Insurance

[Moudrick M. Dadashov]

I'm afraid this is not an accurate assumption, actually the auditors 
require ***full*** EVG compliance.

Thanks,
M.D.

On 12/22/2014 6:46 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
> On 22/12/14 16:34, Stephen Davidson wrote:
>> An observation that may or may not sway your opinion:  the goal of EV
>> was to create uniform requirements across CAs, and this proposal will
>> introduce variation. As I understand it, the "qualified SSL" under
>> eIDAS are likely to be based on EV.  Thus, a "qualified EV" would
>> have an insurance level that "normal EV" may not have.
> If other people want to build standards on EV, we aren't going to stop
> them. But if they add additional requirements, we can't let that force
> us to add those requirements also - because otherwise, everyone else
> would be making the CAB Forum's decisions for us.
>
> Gerv
>
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> Public at cabforum.org
> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3653 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20141222/7bc1c424/attachment-0001.p7s>