[cabfpub] Ballot 169 problem report

[Erwann Abalea]

Bonjour,

The modification of section 3.2.2.4 has consequences on EVG section 11.7.1.
EVG section 11.7.1 says:
(1) […] using a procedure specified in Section 3.2.2.4 of the Baseline Requirements, except that a CA MAY NOT verify a domain using the procedure described subsection 3.2.2.4(7). […]

Due to this rewriting of BR 3.2.2.4, I guess this Section 11.7.1 of EVG should be changed to:
« […] a CA MAY NOT verify a domain using the procedures described subsection 3.2.2.4.7, 3.2.2.4.8, 3.2.2.4.9, and 3.2.2.4.10. »

Cordialement,
Erwann Abalea

Le 7 sept. 2016 à 15:37, Robin Alden <robin at comodo.com<mailto:robin at comodo.com>> a écrit :

Ballot 169 – “Revised Validation Requirements” introduced text into section 3.2.2.4 which refers to section 3.3.1.

“3.2.2.4
…
Completed confirmations of Applicant authority may be valid for the issuance of multiple certificates over time. In all cases, the confirmation must have been initiated within the time period specified in the relevant requirement (such as Section 3.3.1 of this document) prior to certificate issuance. For purposes of domain validation, the term Applicant includes the Applicant's Parent Company, Subsidiary Company, or Affiliate.
…“

Section 3.3.1 of the BRs now consists only of the section heading, with no body text.
“3.3.1. Identification and Authentication for Routine Re‐key”

The text which was at 3.3.1 in the guidelines when we started working on what became ballot 169 read:
Section 6.3.2 limits the validity period of Subscriber Certificates. The CA MAY use the documents and data
provided in Section 3.2 to verify certificate information, provided that the CA obtained the data or document
from a source specified under Section 3.2 no more than thirty‐nine (39) months prior to issuing the
Certificate.
(taken from version 1.3.0 of the BRs)

That text now appears as the third paragraph of 4.2.1 (Performing Identification and Authentication Functions)

Should we move that text back into 3.3.1, or should we change 3.2.2.4 so that the reference points to 4.2.1 instead of pointing to 3.3.1?

Regards
Robin Alden
Comodo

_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
Public at cabforum.org<mailto:Public at cabforum.org>
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20160919/1af4a23d/attachment-0003.html>