[Servercert-wg] Fwd: Re: Ballot SC31 - Browser Alignment

[Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA)]

Dear Members,

I'd like to remind everyone that this is the second time in very short 
time that we are having an unpleasant (at least for me) philosophical 
discussion about "why are we all here" that seems to be addressing the 
"the purpose of the Forum". I encourage people to review this relevant 
thread 
<https://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2019-October/014803.html> 
and the minutes from F2F 48 
<https://cabforum.org/2019/12/12/minutes-for-ca-browser-forum-f2f-meeting-48-guangzhou-5-7-november-2019/#Any-Other-Business>. 


As the Forum and SCWG Chair, I am obligated to interpret the Bylaws as 
objectively as possible. In this particular case, section 1.1 ( Purpose 
of the Forum) and section 1.3 (Intellectual Property Rights Policy; 
Antitrust Laws and Regulations; Goal; Conduct) are clear about the 
purpose, the Goal and how to achieve these goals.

/"The historic goal of Forum activities (including development of 
proposed requirements and guidelines and voting on all matters) has been 
to seek substantial consensus among Forum Members before proceeding or 
adopting final work product, and this goal will remain for the future. 
Members shall not use their participation in the Forum either to promote 
their own products and offerings or to restrict or impede the products 
and offerings of other Members."/

Certificate Issuers and Consumers that bring ballots for discussion and 
voting, must constantly keep in mind these rules and most importantly, 
must meet the spirit of this Forum which is an consensus-oriented 
industry group where all voting members should be treated equally. 
Historically we've seen ballots improving the overall security of the 
ecosystem and these improvements have been proposed from both Voting 
Member categories.

Historically Certificate Consumers had divergences from the Forum's 
Guidelines which were expressed via the individual Certificate Consumer 
Root Program Policies. Participating CAs had to adhere to the Forum's 
Guidelines (thus the "baseline") AND each of the individual Certificate 
Consumer Root Policy. This hasn't changed, nor is it likely to change in 
the future because each Certificate Consumer, understandably, wants to 
preserve the right for independent decisions. These divergences were 
usually captured in each CA's CP/CPS which auditors are supposed to 
audit in addition to the standards. This means that there is already 
independent assurance for these additional requirements as well.

If the existing purpose of the Forum doesn't meet the expectations of a 
Certificate Consumer, this can only be changed via a ballot.


Dimitris
CA/B Forum and SCWG Chair
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20200630/c3140664/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Ryan Sleevi via Servercert-wg <servercert-wg at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC31 - Browser Alignment
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 10:54:01 -0400
Size: 28381
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20200630/c3140664/attachment-0003.eml>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Ben Wilson via Servercert-wg <servercert-wg at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC31 - Browser Alignment
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 17:04:43 -0600
Size: 47842
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20200630/c3140664/attachment-0004.eml>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded message was scrubbed...
From: Clint Wilson via Servercert-wg <servercert-wg at cabforum.org>
Subject: Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC31 - Browser Alignment
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 09:48:15 -0700
Size: 46983
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20200630/c3140664/attachment-0005.eml>