[cabfpub] BR 3.2.2.4.4 question

[Jeremy Rowley]

That was my thoughts as well, but I thought it might make a good discussion. I see them as keywords, not as words set in a particular language.

 

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:sleevi at google.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 3:04 PM
To: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] BR 3.2.2.4.4 question

 

 

 

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Jeremy Rowley via Public <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> > wrote:

Section 3.2.2.4.4 states that CAs can validate an email by “(i) sending an email to one or more addresses created by using 'admin', 'administrator', 'webmaster', 'hostmaster', or 'postmaster' as the local part, followed by the at‐ sign ("@"), followed by an Authorization Domain Name, (ii) including a Random Value in the email, and (iii) receiving a confirming response utilizing the Random Value”. 

 

Recently, we’ve been getting requests to send the email to the Spanish word for administrator (“Administrador” according to Google translate – I don’t speak Spanish). I don’t think this is permitted because the BRs specifically state that the five key email words permitted.   Should translations of those words be allowed?

 

Absolutely not :) 

 

These were allocated because they're either reserved (webmaster, hostmaster, postmaster) or because the CABF made them up based on past practices (admin, administrator). CAs absolutely should not be extending this list :)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/1cdffc2a/attachment-0003.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4984 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20171012/1cdffc2a/attachment-0003.p7s>