[cabfpub] Ballot 143 - Formalization of Validation Working Group

Dean Coclin Dean_Coclin at symantec.com
Fri Feb 13 21:31:20 UTC 2015

Symantec votes YES.


From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On
Behalf Of Jeremy Rowley
Sent: Wednesday, February 04, 2015 4:05 PM
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 143 - Formalization of Validation Working Group


Ballot 143 - Formalization of validation working group






In order to address validation issues and inconsistencies in both the SSL
Baseline Requirements and the EV Guidelines, the CAB Forum has held an
informal working group previously referred to as the Extended Validation
Working Group now known as the Validation Working Group, would like to
modify its scope to include validation in the Baseline Requirements as well
as the EV Guidelines.  


Jeremy Rowley of DigiCert made the following motion, which was endorsed by
Rich Smith of Comodo and Kirk Hall of TrendMicro



Motion begins



The CA-Browser Forum formally establishes the Validation Working Group as an
official working group of the CAB Forum, replacing the previous informal EV
working group.  The scope of this working group is to address issues arising
under adopted CAB Forum standards related to the validation of certificate
information and the inclusion of information in certificates.  


Scope: The Validation Working Group will consider all matters relating to
the validation and inclusion of information in certificates under adopted
CAB Forum guidelines. 


Deliverables: The Working Group shall produce one or more documents offering
options to the Forum for validation within the scope defined above. 



Motion Ends



The review period for this ballot shall commence at 2200 UTC on 5 Feb 2015,
and will close at 2200 UTC on 11 Feb 2015. Unless the motion is withdrawn
during the review period, the voting period will start immediately
thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on 18 Feb 2015. 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/ 


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 nine
(9) members- at least nine 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/20150213/e720aaca/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6130 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150213/e720aaca/attachment-0001.p7s>

More information about the Public mailing list