[Servercert-wg] Ballot SC-52 version 2: Specify CRL Validity Intervals in Seconds (cleanup time interval style)

Tue Jan 4 20:20:23 UTC 2022

Corey and I are working on a cleanup ballot right now, and I agree that cleaning this sort of thing up to be more uniform would be a useful inclusion.

Perhaps we should file a github issue to track it?

-Tim

From: Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org> On Behalf Of Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Servercert-wg
Sent: Tuesday, January 4, 2022 6:45 AM
To: servercert-wg at cabforum.org
Subject: Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC-52 version 2: Specify CRL Validity Intervals in Seconds (cleanup time interval style)

On another matter (decided to start a new thread to separate the two issues), we also observed that there is no consistency on the way time intervals are written. For example:

  *   "one hour",

  *   "sixteen hours",

  *   "seven days",

  *   "ten days",

  *   "twelve months",

  *   "366 days",

  *   "367 days".
We should pick one format style using numbers like "1 hour, 16 hours, 7 days, 10 days, 12 months". I'd be happy to go over the document and propose these updates on this ballot or we could schedule it for a cleanup ballot.

Dimitris.
On 15/12/2021 7:51 π.μ., Dimitris Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Servercert-wg wrote:

HARICA disagrees with adding the following text to the Baseline Requirements:

"**Effective 2022-06-01:** For purposes of computing differences, a difference of 3,600 seconds shall be equal to one hour, and a difference of 86,400 seconds shall be equal to one day, ignoring leap seconds. Any amount of time greater than this, including fractional seconds, shall represent an additional unit of measure, such as an additional hour or additional day."

My team has advised me that when using the standard (vixie) cron, an admin cannot state that an action must take place:

  *   every x minutes, for x>60
  *   every x hours, for x>24
  *   every x days, for x>1
  *   every x months, for x>12
An admin would need to create custom scripts to overcome these problems, thus creating a possibility of human error. It is also not possible to specify seconds. This is just one of the tools that can be used by admins. Windows has the same limitations in the "tasks" scheduling tool.

This is a very simple indication that such a change in the requirements will require significant analysis and implementation effort by all CAs without good justification.

HARICA still doesn't see a clear benefit from generalizing the expectation that all time intervals in the BRs, EVGs, NetSec should be evaluated at the level of 1 second which is an "expensive" compliance obligation and should be applied/enforced in areas where it is really needed. The necessity may come from interoperability risks as we have seen for the validity of certificates and OCSP/CRL. If other areas seem appropriate for this level of accuracy, we should identify, justify and add to the requirements instead of making a general requirement for such an expensive operation.

Dimitris.
On 2/12/2021 5:20 μ.μ., Tim Hollebeek via Servercert-wg wrote:
Ballot SC-52 version 2: Specify CRL Validity Intervals in Seconds
Purpose of Ballot: Similar to Ballot SC-31 which modified the specification of
OCSP validity periods to be in seconds, this ballot modifies the specification
of CRL validity periods to be in seconds to avoid confusion about exactly which
periods are valid and which are not.  The ballot also specifies that other time
periods should be handled the same way, which has broader impacts throughout
the document.

These changes should not be interpreted as implying that missing a deadline by
a few seconds is any more or less important than it previously was.  The
changes are merely intended to provide additional clarity and precision about
exactly where the deadlines are.

The following motion has been proposed by Tim Hollebeek of DigiCert and endorsed
by Trevoli Ponds-White of Amazon and Kati Davids of GoDaddy.

---MOTION BEGINS---

This ballot modifies the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management
of Publicly-Trusted Certificates” (“Baseline Requirements”), based on Version 1.8.0:

MODIFY the Baseline Requirements as specified in the following Redline:

https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/cda0f92ee70121fd5d692685b97ebb6669c74fb7...2b9cf93af71233095f370cdc1d1b587166da4b07

---MOTION ENDS---

This ballot proposes a Final Maintenance Guideline.

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:

Discussion (7+ days)
Start Time: December 2, 2021 10:30 am Eastern
End Time: No earlier than December 9, 2021 10:30 am Eastern
Vote for approval (7 days)
Start Time: TBD
End Time: TBD

_______________________________________________

Servercert-wg mailing list

Servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:Servercert-wg at cabforum.org>

https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg

_______________________________________________

Servercert-wg mailing list

Servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:Servercert-wg at cabforum.org>

https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20220104/cf122892/attachment-0001.html>