[cabfpub] Ballot 125 - CAA Records

[Doug Beattie]

I'm starting to look at making updates to the CPS to support this ballot and
wonder if the wrong section was specified in the ballot.  Is Section 4.2
where this belongs, or is section 3.2 the right place?  

 

Section 4.2 contains high level statements and no real detail, and 4.2
generally refers back to 3.2 for the specifics:

 

4.2. Certificate application processing 

4.2.1. Performing Identification and Authentication Functions 

4.2.2. Approval or Rejection of Certificate Applications 

4.2.3. Time to Process Certificate Applications 

 

Since CAA only applies to some types of certificates, and the details of
domain and Organization Identity for each type of cert are listed in 3.2, it
would make more sense (to me) to include the steps CAs use when processing
CAA records as part of the Domain Control, Ownership or "right to use"
processes that are described in section 3.2.

 

Doug

 

 

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org <mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org>
[mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Ben Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 11:01 AM
To: CABFPub
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 125 - CAA Records

 

Ballot 125 - CAA Records

Rick Andrews of Symantec made the following motion and Jeremy Rowley of
Digicert and Ryan Sleevi of Google have endorsed it: 

Reasons for proposed ballot RFC 6844 defines a Certification Authority
Authorization DNS Resource Record (CAA). A CAA allows a DNS domain name
holder to specify the CAs authorized to issue certificates for that domain.
Publication of the CAA gives CAs and domain holders additional controls to
reduce the risk of unintended certificate mis-issuance. 

The proponents of this ballot believe that this proposed modification to the
Baseline Requirements, which gives CAs up to six months to update their CP
and/or CPS to state the degree to which they implement CAA, provides all CAs
with the flexibility needed to begin implementation of CAA. 

---MOTION BEGINS--- 

Add to Section 4 Definitions, new item: 

CAA: From RFC 6844 ( <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6844>
http:tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6844): "The Certification Authority
Authorization (CAA) DNS Resource Record allows a DNS domain name holder to
specify the Certification Authorities (CAs) authorized to issue certificates
for that domain. Publication of CAA Resource Records allows a public
Certification Authority to implement additional controls to reduce the risk
of unintended certificate mis-issue." 

Add the following to the end of Section 8.2.2, Disclosure: 

Effective as of [insert date that is six months from Ballot 125 adoption],
section 4.2 of a CA's Certificate Policy and/or Certification Practice
Statement (section 4.1 for CAs still conforming to RFC 2527) SHALL state
whether the CA reviews CAA Records, and if so, the CA's policy or practice
on processing CAA Records for Fully Qualified Domain Names. The CA SHALL log
all actions taken, if any, consistent with its processing practice. 

The resulting Section 8.2.2 would read as follows: 

The CA SHALL publicly disclose its Certificate Policy and/or Certification
Practice Statement through an appropriate and readily accessible online
means that is available on a 24x7 basis. The CA SHALL publicly disclose its
CA business practices to the extent required by the CA's selected audit
scheme (see Section 17.1). The disclosures MUST include all the material
required by RFC 2527 or RFC 3647, and MUST be structured in accordance with
either RFC 2527 or RFC 3647. Effective as of [insert date that is six months
from Ballot 125 adoption], section 4.2 of a CA's Certificate Policy and/or
Certification Practice Statement (section 4.1 for CAs still conforming to
RFC 2527) SHALL state whether the CA reviews CAA Records, and if so, the
CA's policy or practice on processing CAA Records for Fully Qualified Domain
Names. The CA SHALL log all actions taken, if any, consistent with its
processing practice. 

---MOTION ENDS--- 

The review period for this ballot shall commence at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 30
September 2014, and will close at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 7 October 2014.
Unless the motion is withdrawn during the review period, the voting period
will start immediately thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on Tuesday, 14
October 2014. Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread.


A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response. A
vote against must indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain
must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the response. Unclear responses will not
be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting
member before the close of the voting period will be counted. Voting members
are listed here:  <https://cabforum.org/members/>
https://cabforum.org/members/ 

In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes cast
by members in the CA category and greater than 50% of the votes cast by
members in the browser category must be in favor. Quorum is currently seven
(7) members- at least seven members must participate in the ballot, either
by voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining. 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20141031/16ce8269/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5615 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20141031/16ce8269/attachment-0001.p7s>