[cabfpub] Ballot 110 - Motion to Adopt Version 1.1 of the Bylaws

[Jeremy Rowley]

Adobe and Oracle are the two primary root store operators that aren't
interested in SSL but are interested in other types of certs. 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of Gervase Markham
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 8:21 AM
To: Ryan Sleevi; Ben Wilson
Cc: CABFPub
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] Ballot 110 - Motion to Adopt Version 1.1 of the
Bylaws

On 18/01/14 00:37, Ryan Sleevi wrote:
> 2) Section 2.1 ("authenticate digitally signed code") is still a much 
> greater increase of scope of the work of the members. I'd prefer if we 
> could leave that for broader discussion. While I'm aware of the "Code 
> Signing WG" discussions, this change in definitions has the effective 
> quality of allowing/encouraging vendors with no/limited stake in the 
> SSL/TLS ecosystem to vote on changes to the BRs / EVGs, and vice versa.
> I'm sure you can recognize at it's face, that has some degree of 
> undesirability, and effectively changes the "CA/Browser Forum" to the 
> "CA/ISV Forum"

But they still have to actually manage a root store, don't they? Can you
give an example of a company who would be admissible under the new rules who
you think is not interested in the SSL/TLS ecosystem?

Gerv
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public