[cabfpub] Bergamo F2F Agenda Item

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)]

On 16/5/2024 3:17 μ.μ., Arno Fiedler wrote:
>
> Hello Dimitris,
>
> the GLEIF has developed the concept of a “Verifiable Legal 
> Identifier”, the  qvLEI are issued by a trusted network of “qualified” 
> vLEI Issuers.
> That seems to be an interesting and important new topic in the field 
> of organizational identities/OV based on LEI
>
> We can ask the GLEIF CEO Stepan Worl for a lecture, let me know if I 
> should ask him (like in 2017)
>

There is a new CEO taking over June 26, 2024. For me this sounds very 
interesting and I've been following this work for a while. I assume you 
are suggesting that we have a guest speaker on this topic in a future 
F2F meeting, not the one in Bergamo which is just around the corner.


Thanks,
Dimitris.

> Best regards
>
> Arno
>
> *Von:*Public <public-bounces at cabforum.org> *Im Auftrag von *Dimitris 
> Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public
> *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 14. Mai 2024 17:28
> *An:* Ben Wilson <bwilson at mozilla.com>
> *Cc:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
> *Betreff:* Re: [cabfpub] Bergamo F2F Agenda Item
>
> On 14/5/2024 6:08 μ.μ., Ben Wilson wrote:
>
>     Hi Dimitris,
>
>     There appears to be an open slot on the F2F agenda - Wed. May 29th
>     at 9:05 a.m.  I was thinking we could use that time to discuss
>     revocation timelines and balancing the security provided by
>     revocation with the security/stability needed to support critical
>     infrastructure. In other words, we could discuss BR section 4.9.1
>     and  concerns about disruption of global/national operations in
>     banking/finance, transportation, government, telecommunications,
>     healthcare, and other key areas where certificate revocation might
>     cause key systems to fail.
>
>     Should I put this topic in that open slot on the wiki?
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Ben
>
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> I think that would be great. I assume you will be leading this session.
>
> I think it's a great opportunity for CAs with past experience on 
> delayed revocations to share some insight about specific challenges in 
> the sectors you listed, and possibly add some that are missing.
>
> FYI, public evidence for delayed revocation incidents (open and 
> closed, based on specific tags) is available in this link 
> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?f1=OP&f4=CP&v2=ca-compliance&f2=status_whiteboard&o2=allwordssubstr&component=CA%20Certificate%20Compliance&query_format=advanced&list_id=17029100&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&v3=delayed-revocation%20leaf-revocation-delay&resolution=---&resolution=FIXED&resolution=INVALID&resolution=WONTFIX&resolution=DUPLICATE&resolution=WORKSFORME&o3=anywordssubstr&f3=status_whiteboard>.
>
> Although you mentioned that this affects the BR section 4.9.1, this 
> topic affects all Working Groups because all the WG BRs have a section 
> 4.9.1 that is pretty much similar with the TLS BRs. With that said, I 
> would like to ask if Members have any objections for discussing this 
> topic as part of the Forum plenary.
>
>
> Thank you,
> Dimitris
> CA/B Forum Chair
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20240516/38ddeff2/attachment-0001.html>