[Servercert-wg] Discussion Period Begins on Ballot SC43 Version 2: Clarify Acceptable Status Codes

Thu Apr 1 18:04:40 UTC 2021

> For me, this raises two questions:
> 1) For ballot authors, where are standards/requirements like this documented? As someone relatively new to this community, the structure of this ballot seemed reasonable to me: there are not currently any other ballots in the pipeline which will be effective prior to the chosen date of July 1, so simply noting "this document has changed, and that change will go into effect on July 1" seems sufficient. How do we clearly document ballot best practices and style guides?

I didn’t come across any documentation describing how to make changes effective on a certain date. Another option, aside from introducing new methods and sunsetting the old ones, would be to incorporate the effective date into methods 18 and 19 directly, but that just doesn’t seem clean to me in this case. If there are best practices around making changes with an effective date, having them documented would definitely be helpful.
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 1:32 PM Ryan Sleevi via Servercert-wg <servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org>> wrote:
The semantics of 303 indicate that the new resource (referred to via the Location field) is not necessarily the same as the requested resource. The semantics/interpretation of that redirected-to-resource are left up to the user and user agent, while the goal with this was to ensure unambiguous semantics.

>From RFC 7231, Section 6.4.4 (Emphasis added)
   The 303 (See Other) status code indicates that the server is
   redirecting the user agent to a different resource, as indicated by a
   URI in the Location header field, which is intended to provide an
   indirect response to the original request.  A user agent can perform
   a retrieval request targeting that URI (a GET or HEAD request if
   using HTTP), which might also be redirected, and present the eventual
   result as an answer to the original request.  Note that the new URI
   in the Location header field is not considered equivalent to the
   effective request URI.

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:12 PM Bruce Morton via Servercert-wg <servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org>> wrote:
Hi Niko,

Our team believes that a single 303 redirect from http to https scheme for the same fqdn should be acceptable. Is there a reason why 303 is not allowed?

Thanks, Bruce.

From: Servercert-wg <servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org<mailto:servercert-wg-bounces at cabforum.org>> On Behalf Of Niko Carpenter via Servercert-wg
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2021 11:51 AM
To: CA/B Forum Server Certificate WG Public Discussion List <servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:servercert-wg at cabforum.org>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [Servercert-wg] Discussion Period Begins on Ballot SC43 Version 2: Clarify Acceptable Status Codes

WARNING: This email originated outside of Entrust.
DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you trust the sender and know the content is safe.
________________________________

This begins the discussion period for ballot SC43 version 2: Clarify Acceptable Status Codes. An effective date of July 1, 2021 was added in this version.

Purpose of Ballot:

This ballot clarifies the allowed HTTP status codes used for following redirects in domain validation methods 18 and 19, and specifies that the target URI must come from the Location response header.
In Section 3.2.2.4.18 and 3.2.2.4.19, it replaces
"Redirects MUST be the result of an HTTP status code result within the 3xx Redirection class of status codes, as defined in RFC 7231, Section 6.4." with the following:

  * "Redirects MUST be the result of a 301, 302, 307, or 308 HTTP status code response."
  * "Redirects MUST be to resource URLs contained in the Location HTTP response header."

The following motion has been proposed by Niko Carpenter of SecureTrust and endorsed by Corey Bonnell of DigiCert and Ryan Sleevi of Google.

--MOTION BEGINS--

This ballot modifies the “Baseline Requirements for the Issuance and Management of Publicly-Trusted Certificates” as defined in the following redline, based on Version 1.7.3:

https://github.com/cabforum/servercert/compare/2b7720f7821764f0ea9d0d583ec5c61896a3f4cd..bd7915249a0360a28fe37b785c367d70645c7e8f<https://scanmail.trustwave.com/?c=4062&d=j4fm4F8ydpSbZb1aWH38vmDyyAGMeIOXtRu4fT9Hpg&s=5&u=https%3a%2f%2furldefense%2ecom%2fv3%2f%5f%5fhttps%3a%2fgithub%2ecom%2fcabforum%2fservercert%2fcompare%2f2b7720f7821764f0ea9d0d583ec5c61896a3f4cd%2e%2ebd7915249a0360a28fe37b785c367d70645c7e8f%5f%5f%3b%21%21FJ-Y8qCqXTj2%21KxKv-CtjQAa8iFbqK28UGadVW-RtBhLDI6KojNS-ZPHoM7hVPtd7V-VgBtC8mR0RQLM%24>

--MOTION ENDS--

This ballot proposes a Final Maintenance Guideline.

The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows:

Discussion (7+ days)

Start Time: 11-March 2021 21:30 UTC

End Time: 01-April 2021 16:00 UTC

Vote for approval (7 days)

Start Time: 01-April 2021 16:00 UTC

End Time: 08-April 2021 16:00 UTC

Niko Carpenter
Software Engineer
www.securetrust.com<https://scanmail.trustwave.com/?c=4062&d=j4fm4F8ydpSbZb1aWH38vmDyyAGMeIOXtRztL25G9g&s=5&u=https%3a%2f%2furldefense%2ecom%2fv3%2f%5f%5fhttp%3a%2fwww%2esecuretrust%2ecom%5f%5f%3b%21%21FJ-Y8qCqXTj2%21KxKv-CtjQAa8iFbqK28UGadVW-RtBhLDI6KojNS-ZPHoM7hVPtd7V-VgBtC8q5c4vII%24>
2020 Best PCI Compliance Provider Winner – Card Not Present Awards
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
_______________________________________________
Servercert-wg mailing list
Servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:Servercert-wg at cabforum.org>
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg<https://scanmail.trustwave.com/?c=4062&d=j4fm4F8ydpSbZb1aWH38vmDyyAGMeIOXtUnpLWwVpQ&s=5&u=https%3a%2f%2flists%2ecabforum%2eorg%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fservercert-wg>
_______________________________________________
Servercert-wg mailing list
Servercert-wg at cabforum.org<mailto:Servercert-wg at cabforum.org>
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg<https://scanmail.trustwave.com/?c=4062&d=j4fm4F8ydpSbZb1aWH38vmDyyAGMeIOXtUnpLWwVpQ&s=5&u=https%3a%2f%2flists%2ecabforum%2eorg%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2fservercert-wg>
This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/servercert-wg/attachments/20210401/cbe68662/attachment-0001.html>