[cabfpub] Ballot 197 ? Effective Date of Ballot 193 Provisions (amended April 26)

Tue May 2 08:32:55 UTC 2017

Comodo votes ‘Yes’ to ballot 197.
Regards
Robin Alden
Comodo

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via
Public
Sent: 26 April 2017 06:45
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Cc: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 197 - Effective Date of Ballot 193 Provisions
(amended April 26)

Sorry, I lost version control on Ballot 197 (originally sent to the Public
list on April 19) in my message earlier today - we are still in the
Discussion Period, and so we can clearly make amendments.
To restate my earlier message, based on discussions on the list about the
uncertain status of Ballot 194, the proposer and endorsers for Ballot 197
wish to amend Ballot 197 as shown below and on the attached.  The amendment
is basically to add a Section 3 that says: “"Section 3: The vote on Ballot
194 and the Review Period notice issued for Ballot 194 are hereby declared
null and void and of no effect, and are rescinded.”

Voting on this amended ballot will begin tomorrow, April 26, at 22:00 UTC.

Ballot 197 - Effective Date of Ballot 193 Provisions (amended April 26)

Recent Ballot 193 reduced the maximum period for certificates and for reuse
of vetting data for DV and OV certificates from 39 months to 825 days.  The
effective date for reducing the maximum validity period of certificates was
specified as March 1, 2018, but no effective date was specified for when the
reduction of the maximum period for reuse of vetting data becomes effective.

It was the intention of the authors of Ballot 193 that the effective date
for reducing the maximum period for reuse of vetting data under BR 4.2.1
would also be March 1, 2018.  This ballot is intended to clarify that
intention.  The ballot also makes these changes retroactive to the effective
date of Ballot 193 so there is no gap period.

Ballot 193 is in the Review Period (which will end on April 22, 2017), and
has not yet taken effect.  Bylaw 2.3 states that Ballots should include a
“redline or comparison showing the set of changes from the Final Guideline
section(s) intended to become a Final Maintenance Guideline” and that “[s]
uch redline or comparison shall be made against the Final Guideline
section(s) as they exist at the time a ballot is proposed”.

To avoid confusion, this Ballot will show the proposed changes to BR 4.2.1
will be presented two ways: (1) a comparison of the changes to BR 4.2.1 as
it existed before Ballot 193 (which is as BR 4.2.1 exists at this time this
ballot is proposed), and also (2) a comparison of the changes to BR 4.2.1 as
it will exist after the Review Period for Ballot 193 is completed (assuming
no Exclusion Notices are filed).

The following motion has been proposed by Chris Bailey of Entrust Datacard
and endorsed by Ben Wilson of DigiCert, and Wayne Thayer of GoDaddy to
introduce new Final Maintenance Guidelines for the "Baseline Requirements
Certificate Policy for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-Trusted
Certificates" (Baseline Requirements) and the "Guidelines for the Issuance
and Management of Extended Validation Certificates" (EV Guidelines).

-- MOTION BEGINS --

Ballot Section 1

BR 4.2.1 is amended to read as follows:

[Ballot amendments shown against BR 4.2.1 as it currently exists without the
changes adopted in Ballot 193]

BR 4.2.1. Performing Identification and Authentication Functions

The certificate request MAY include all factual information about the
Applicant to be included in the Certificate, and such additional information
as is necessary for the CA to obtain from the Applicant in order to comply
with these Requirements and the CA’s Certificate Policy and/or
Certification Practice Statement. In cases where the certificate request
does not contain all the necessary information about the Applicant, the CA
SHALL obtain the remaining information from the Applicant or, having
obtained it from a reliable, independent, third‐party data source, confirm
it with the Applicant. The CA SHALL establish and follow a documented
procedure for verifying all data requested for inclusion in the Certificate
by the Applicant.

Applicant information MUST include, but not be limited to, at least one
Fully‐Qualified Domain Name or IP address to be included in the
Certificate’s SubjectAltName extension.

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.

(1) Prior to March 1, 2018, the CA obtained the data or document from a
source specified under Section 3.2 no more than 39 months prior to issuing
the Certificate; and

(2) On or after March 1, 2018, the CA obtained the data or document from a
source specified under Section 3.2 no more than 825 days prior to issuing
the Certificate.

The CA SHALL develop, maintain, and implement documented procedures that
identify and require additional verification activity for High Risk
Certificate Requests prior to the Certificate’s approval, as reasonably
necessary to ensure that such requests are properly verified under these
Requirements.

If a Delegated Third Party fulfills any of the CA’s obligations under this
section, the CA SHALL verify that the process used by the Delegated Third
Party to identify and further verify High Risk Certificate Requests provides
at least the same level of assurance as the CA’s own processes.

[Ballot amendments shown against BR 4.2.1 as it existed after Ballot 193 was
approved]

BR 4.2.1. Performing Identification and Authentication Functions

The certificate request MAY include all factual information about the
Applicant to be included in the Certificate, and such additional information
as is necessary for the CA to obtain from the Applicant in order to comply
with these Requirements and the CA’s Certificate Policy and/or
Certification Practice Statement. In cases where the certificate request
does not contain all the necessary information about the Applicant, the CA
SHALL obtain the remaining information from the Applicant or, having
obtained it from a reliable, independent, third‐party data source, confirm
it with the Applicant. The CA SHALL establish and follow a documented
procedure for verifying all data requested for inclusion in the Certificate
by the Applicant.

Applicant information MUST include, but not be limited to, at least one
Fully‐Qualified Domain Name or IP address to be included in the
Certificate’s SubjectAltName extension.

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 825 days prior to issuing
the Certificate.

(1) Prior to March 1, 2018, the CA obtained the data or document from a
source specified under Section 3.2 no more than 39 months prior to issuing
the Certificate; and

(2) On or after March 1, 2018, the CA obtained the data or document from a
source specified under Section 3.2 no more than 825 days prior to issuing
the Certificate.

The CA SHALL develop, maintain, and implement documented procedures that
identify and require additional verification activity for High Risk
Certificate Requests prior to the Certificate’s approval, as reasonably
necessary to ensure that such requests are properly verified under these
Requirements.

If a Delegated Third Party fulfills any of the CA’s obligations under this
section, the CA SHALL verify that the process used by the Delegated Third
Party to identify and further verify High Risk Certificate Requests provides
at least the same level of assurance as the CA’s own processes.

Ballot Section 2

The provisions of Ballot Section 1 will be effective retroactive to the
effective date of Ballot 193.

Ballot Section 3

The vote on Ballot 194 and the Review Period notice issued for Ballot 194
are hereby declared null and void and of no effect, and are rescinded.

--Motion Ends--

The procedure for approval of this Final Maintenance Guideline ballot is as
follows (exact start and end times may be adjusted to comply with applicable
Bylaws and IPR Agreement):

BALLOT 197
Status: Final Maintenance Guideline
Start time (22:00 UTC)
End time (22:00 UTC)

Discussion (7 to 14 days)
April 19, 2017
April 26, 2017

Vote for approval (7 days)
April 26, 2017
May 3, 2017

If vote approves ballot: Review Period (Chair to send Review Notice) (30
days).
If Exclusion Notice(s) filed, ballot approval is rescinded and PAG to be
created.
If no Exclusion Notices filed, ballot becomes effective at end of Review
Period.
Upon filing of Review Notice by Chair
30 days after filing of Review Notice by Chair

>From Bylaw 2.3: If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final
Maintenance Guideline, such ballot will include a redline or comparison
showing the set of changes from the Final Guideline section(s) intended to
become a Final Maintenance Guideline, and need not include a copy of the
full set of guidelines.  Such redline or comparison shall be made against
the Final Guideline section(s) as they exist at the time a ballot is
proposed, and need not take into consideration other ballots that may be
proposed subsequently, except as provided in Bylaw Section 2.3(j).

Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the Public
list.  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 shown on
CA/Browser Forum wiki.  Under Bylaw 2.2(g), at least the required quorum
number must participate in the ballot for the ballot to be valid, either by
voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170502/6e3b7d56/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5132 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20170502/6e3b7d56/attachment-0001.bin>