[cabfpub] Ballot 143 - Formalization of Validation Working Group

[Robin Alden]

Comodo votes 'Yes'.

 

Regards
Robin Alden

Comodo

 

From: public-bounces at cabforum.org [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org]
On Behalf Of Jeremy Rowley
Sent: 04 February 2015 21:05
To: CABFPub
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 143 - Formalization of Validation Working
Group

 

Ballot 143 - Formalization of validation working group

 

----

Reason 

----

 

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withdrawn during the review period, the voting period will start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/20150217/75790759/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5156 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20150217/75790759/attachment-0001.p7s>