[cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot SC3 version 2

Thu Aug 16 11:59:55 UTC 2018

Chunghwa Telecom Votes “Yes” to ballot SC3 version 2.

Li-Chun Chen

From: Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2018 4:01 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List
Subject: [外部郵件] Re: [cabfpub] Voting has started on Ballot SC3 version 2

HARICA votes "yes" to ballot SC3 version 2.

Dimitris.

On 13/8/2018 7:27 μμ, Kirk Hall via Public wrote:

See text and link below.  Voting ends on Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 11:45 am Eastern.

From: Servercert-wg [mailto:servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek via Servercert-wg
Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2018 8:48 AM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Cc: servercert-wg at cabforum.org
Subject: [EXTERNAL][Servercert-wg] Voting begins: Ballot SC3 version 2

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/SC3-PasswordChangesDieDieDie?expand=1

Ballot SC3: Two-Factor Authentication and Password Improvements

Purpose of Ballot: The Network Security Working Group met a number of times to 

improve the Network Security Guidelines requirements around authentication,

specifically by requiring two-factor authentication, and improving the password 

requirements in line with more recent NIST guidelines.

While CAs are encouraged to improve their password requirements as soon as 

possible, a two year grace period is being given to allow organizations to 

develop and implement policies to implement the improved requirements, especially

since some organizations may have to simultaneously comply with other

compliance frameworks that have not been updated yet and are based on older NIST 

guidance about passwords.

The following motion has been proposed by Tim Hollebeek of DigiCert and endorsed 

by Dimitris Zacharopoulos of Harica and Neil Dunbar of TrustCor.

— MOTION BEGINS –

This ballot modifies the “Network and Certificate System Security Requirements” 

as follows, based upon Version 1.1:

In the definitions, add a definition for Multi-Factor Authentication:

"Multi-Factor Authentication: An authentication mechanism consisting of two or 

more of the following independent categories of credentials (i.e. factors) to 

verify the user’s identity for a login or other transaction: something you know 

(knowledge factor), something you have (possession factor), and something you 

are (inherence factor).  Each factor must be independent.  Certificate-based 

authentication can be used as part of Multifactor Authentication only if the 

private key is stored in a Secure Key Storage Device."

Capitalize all instances of the defined term "Multi-Factor Authentication".

Add a definition for Secure Key Storage Device:

"Secure Key Storage Device: A device certified as meeting at least FIPS 140-2

level 2 overall, level 3 physical, or Common Criteria (EAL 4+)."

In section 1.j., capitalize Multi-Factor Authentication, and strike the 

parenthetical reference to subsection 2.n.(ii).

In section 2.f., add "(for accountability purposes, group accounts or shared

role credentials SHALL NOT be used)" after "authenticate to Certificate Systems".

Change section 2.g. to read:

"g. If an authentication control used by a Trusted Role is a username and password, 

    then, where technically feasible, implement the following controls:

  i.           For accounts that are accessible only within Secure Zones or High Security 

               Zones, require that passwords have at least twelve (12) characters; 

  ii.          For authentications which cross a zone boundary into a Secure Zone or High 

               Security Zone, require Multi-Factor Authentication.  For accounts accessible 

               from outside a Secure Zone or High Security Zone require passwords that have 

               at least eight (8) characters and are not be one of the user's previous 

               four (4) passwords; and implement account lockout for failed access attempts 

               in accordance with subsection k;

  iii.         When developing password policies, CAs SHOULD take into account the password 

               guidance in NIST 800-63B Appendix A.

  iv.          Frequent password changes have been shown to cause users to select less 

               secure passwords.  If the CA has any policy that specifies routine periodic 

               password changes, that period SHOULD NOT be less than two years.  Effective 

               April 1, 2020, if the CA has any policy that requires routine periodic password 

               changes, that period SHALL NOT be less than two years.

In section 2.h., change "Require" to "Have a policy that requires"

In section 2.i., change "Configure" to "Have a procedure to configure"

Change section 2.k. to read:

"k. Lockout account access to Certificate Systems after no more than five (5) failed 

    access attempts, provided that this security measure:

  i.           is supported by the Certificate System,

  ii.          Cannot be leveraged for a denial of service attack, and

  iii.        does not weaken the security of this authentication control;"

Change section 2.n. to read:

"Enforce Multi-Factor Authentication for all Trusted Role accounts on Certificate

Systems (including those approving the issuance of a Certificate, which equally

applies to Delegated Third Parties) that are accessible from outside a Secure Zone

or High Security Zone; and"

— MOTION ENDS –

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:

Discussion (7+ days)

Start Time: 2018-07-26  17:45 Eastern

End Time: 2018-08-09 11:45 Eastern

Vote for approval (7 days)

Start Time: 2018-08-09 11:45 Eastern

End Time: 2018-08-16 11:45 Eastern

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

本信件可能包含中華電信股份有限公司機密資訊,非指定之收件者,請勿蒐集、處理或利用本信件內容,並請銷毀此信件. 如為指定收件者,應確實保護郵件中本公司之營業機密及個人資料,不得任意傳佈或揭露,並應自行確認本郵件之附檔與超連結之安全性,以共同善盡資訊安全與個資保護責任. 
Please be advised that this email message (including any attachments) contains confidential information and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy this message and all attachments from your system and do not further collect, process, or use them. Chunghwa Telecom and all its subsidiaries and associated companies shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission of the information contained in this email nor for any delay in its receipt or damage to your system. If you are the intended recipient, please protect the confidential and/or personal information contained in this email with due care. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Also, please self-inspect attachments and hyperlinks contained in this email to ensure the information security and to protect personal information.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20180816/55c43037/attachment-0003.html>