[cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: New RFC on CT Domain Label Redaction
Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com
Tue Nov 28 05:40:40 UTC 2017
Gerv, your summary document is a brilliant idea, and a very good start. We will discuss this approach on our CABF teleconference on Thursday.
Entrust Datacard wants to offer additional comments to the summary. I'm afraid if everyone just modifies the document on a wiki, it could become a mess. Can we all send our additional comments to you instead, and let you organize and add them to the master document?
From: Gervase Markham [mailto:gerv at mozilla.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:04 AM
To: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>; CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <public at cabforum.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] New RFC on CT Domain Label Redaction
On 03/11/17 23:23, Kirk Hall via Public wrote:
> This email is to lay out the course we want to follow to complete the
> technical specs for Redaction in the IETF, and also to address the
> recourse issues and consider appropriate changes to the Forum’s
> Baseline Requirements in response.
In order to try and bring some light to this discussion, I have attempted to summarise the arguments for and against CT redaction here:
I can only extract data from recently-posted messages and IDs, so the document is clearly incomplete. If you have an additional consideration to add, or a response to an existing one, or want to improve the text, feel free - it's a wiki. If you are unable or unwilling to get a login (they do need approving, but it doesn't normally take long) then you can send edits to me, although I reserve the right to edit your edits ;-)
More information about the Public