[Servercert-wg] Ballot SC3 - Version 2

Fri Aug 3 08:55:04 MST 2018

Thank you Mike.  Looking forward to hearing your concerns and any proposed
improvements.

-Tim

From: Mike Reilly (GRC) <Mike.Reilly at microsoft.com> 
Sent: Thursday, August 2, 2018 5:52 PM
To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek at digicert.com>; CA/B Forum Server
Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg at cabforum.org>;
CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: RE: Ballot SC3 - Version 2

Hi Tim.  We like the clarification Wayne added to this version of the
ballot.  We still have some offline discussion underway with regard to the
auditability of this proposed password requirement.  I'd like another day or
two to complete those discussions.  Thanks, Mike

From: Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org
<mailto:servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org> > On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek via
Servercert-wg
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 2:46 PM
To: Tim Hollebeek <tim.hollebeek at digicert.com
<mailto:tim.hollebeek at digicert.com> >; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion
List <public at cabforum.org <mailto:public at cabforum.org> >;
servercert-wg at cabforum.org <mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org> 
Subject: Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC3 - Version 2

This just incorporates Wayne's excellent clarification of the password
change requirements.

-Tim

From: Public <public-bounces at cabforum.org
<mailto:public-bounces at cabforum.org> > On Behalf Of Tim Hollebeek via Public
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 5:45 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org
<mailto:public at cabforum.org> >; servercert-wg at cabforum.org
<mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org> 
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot SC3 - Version 2

https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/SC3-PasswordChangesDieDieDie?e
xpand=1
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com
%2Fcabforum%2Fdocuments%2Fcompare%2FSC3-PasswordChangesDieDieDie%3Fexpand%3D
1&data=02%7C01%7CMike.reilly%40microsoft.com%7Caa89b0c894b047d63ca708d5f3412
e00%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636682383639947373&sdata=Il
u59u%2BkOfueBw0CkLzxHZRyVFZrhAEPVLjwQEdZ968%3D&reserved=0> 

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: not before 2018-08-02 17:00:00 Eastern

Vote for approval (7 days)

Start Time: TBD

End Time: TBD

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20180803/cc5a533c/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4940 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20180803/cc5a533c/attachment-0001.p7s>