[cabfpub] Voting begins for Ballot 223 v2 - Update BR Section 8.4 for CA audit criteria

Moudrick M. Dadashov md at ssc.lt
Mon May 14 22:57:34 UTC 2018


SSC votes: "Yes".

Thanks,
M.D.


On 5/8/2018 3:51 PM, Tim Hollebeek via Public wrote:
>
> DigiCert votes yes on Ballot 223 v2.
>
> -Tim
>
> *From:*Public [mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Dimitris Zacharopoulos via Public
> *Sent:* Monday, May 7, 2018 5:49 PM
> *To:* public at cabforum.org
> *Subject:* [cabfpub] Voting begins for Ballot 223 v2 - Update BR 
> Section 8.4 for CA audit criteria
>
> The following motion has been proposed by Dimitris Zacharopoulos of 
> HARICA and endorsed by Moudrick M. Dadashov of SSC and Tim Hollebeek 
> from Digicert.
>
> *Background*:
>
> Section 8.4 of the Baseline Requirements describes the audit criteria 
> for CAs that issue Publicly-Trusted SSL/TLS Certificates. This ballot 
> attempts to achieve two things:
>
>  1. Remove the old ETSI TS documents
>  2. Align the WebTrust and ETSI requirements
>
> "WebTrust for Certification Authorities" is equivalent to "ETSI EN 319 
> 401" and "WebTrust Principles and Criteria for Certification 
> Authorities – SSL Baseline with Network Security" combined with 
> "WebTrust for Certification Authorities" is equivalent to "ETSI EN 319 
> 411-1".
>
> *-- MOTION BEGINS --*
>
> Replace the first two numbered items in section 8.4 from:
>
>  1. WebTrust for Certification Authorities v2.0;
>  2. A national scheme that audits conformance to ETSI TS 102 042 /
>     ETSI EN 319 411-1; or
>
> to:
>
>  1. "WebTrust for CAs v2.0 or newer" AND "WebTrust for CAs SSL
>     Baseline with Network Security v2.2 or newer"; or
>  2. ETSI EN 319 411-1, which includes normative references to ETSI EN
>     319 401 (the latest version of the referenced ETSI documents
>     should be applied); or
>
> *-- MOTION ENDS --*
>
> The procedure for this ballot is as follows (exact start and end times 
> may be adjusted to comply with applicable Bylaws and IPR Agreement):
>
> *BALLOT 223 v2 Status: Update BR Section 8.4 for CA audit criteria*
>
> 	
>
> *Start time (22:00 UTC)*
>
> 	
>
> *End time (22:00 UTC)*
>
> Discussion (7+ days)
>
> 	
>
> 30 April 2018
>
> 	
>
> 7 May 2018
>
> Vote for approval (7 days)
>
> 	
>
> 8 May 2018
>
> 	
>
> 15 May 2018
>
> 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 If Exclusion Notice(s) filed, ballot approval is rescinded and PAG to 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.
> Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the 
> Public Mail List.
>
> 	
>
> Upon filing of Review Notice by Chair
>
> 	
>
> 30 days after filing of Review Notice by Chair
>
> From the Bylaws section 2.4(a): "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 Section 2.4(j) below".
>
> 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://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/6nKZ2vQ7ig7LqR0KvJsPs1hG6bUl9gRMe5RAxSGPOao=?d=ucKDa9fX4Cxir0ODbPk-zzBzaqYGIC1us3WCoccm_8n6uQaVIdFHBNrvNmfaKz-Re4owxn_L6bTwVKvgkUZWDdpyFCvUZKvdVt0PRTWNoW1tcgoH51YaPacM8b6U_JRBzoYD6yU_7vt4pLoqT0YqyD6dtzRr4fN4rN9wGwIwYoRKNEJh1_CoUuO-oSZceqh-BptRvZBBP-Gqw-JmEpqkm1R1AgiU6QdLhUmUOfUtkC_7b9RyPcmeRywE22YPSrzBcR9-jVjjj0jtxE7jeUbNDjyeRUQkrTv8kKY6fxLWyKChmW0Rvy3ouT8h3HbPqlW8WUFvB20rWrJc-UXZZcj_dWdkSNrZwbJSVVTR7PPzfbi83T5Q03s57lZ65bUazy2iA_eDR6AGwrm2a05n4Cd1Ml-HlegnWXsZrMsZ4KGf8q28I0yFAPsfo2SS4ap8Z_3iBA4L220Y-BJ2&u=https%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmembers%2F> 
>
>
> 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 the Bylaws section 2.3(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.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Public mailing list
> 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/20180515/20341fd0/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Public mailing list