[cabf_validation] Ballot 190 Section 2

[Jeremy Rowley]

Correct. If the intent is to permit reuse of data for 825 days, then we need
a section in the BRs that permits use of section 7 (and any modified
sections) for 825 days.

 

From: Doug Beattie [mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 1:07 PM
To: Kirk Hall <Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com>; CA/Browser Forum Validation
WG List <validation at cabforum.org>; Jeremy Rowley
<jeremy.rowley at digicert.com>
Subject: RE: Ballot 190 Section 2

 

Section 3.2 lists the approved methods "at time of issuance".  Section 4.2
says how long you can reuse data.  So we need a statement somewhere that
says method 11 data is permissible for use for the next 825 days, will that
solve the issue?

 

 

From: Kirk Hall [mailto:Kirk.Hall at entrustdatacard.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 3:00 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Validation WG List <validation at cabforum.org
<mailto:validation at cabforum.org> >; Jeremy Rowley
<jeremy.rowley at digicert.com <mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com> >
Cc: Doug Beattie <doug.beattie at globalsign.com
<mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com> >
Subject: RE: Ballot 190 Section 2

 

Right now, we are in the process of reducing the reuse period for domain and
other validation data from 39 months to 825 days.  Isn't that the rule that
applies here, even to domain validations under old method 7 and new method
11 ("any other method")?  I'm not sure we need to layer on more rules.

From: Validation [mailto:validation-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Doug
Beattie via Validation
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 11:52 AM
To: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com
<mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com> >; CA/Browser Forum Validation WG List
<validation at cabforum.org <mailto:validation at cabforum.org> >
Cc: Doug Beattie <doug.beattie at globalsign.com
<mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com> >
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabf_validation] Ballot 190 Section 2

 

OK, so we need to say that as of some date (the date we remove method 11,
the ballot effective date) you can't re-use cert data if it hasn't been
collected since January 1, 2015 (or some date) under one of the current 10
domain verification methods.

 

From: Jeremy Rowley [mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 2:41 PM
To: Doug Beattie <doug.beattie at globalsign.com
<mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com> >; CA/Browser Forum Validation WG List
<validation at cabforum.org <mailto:validation at cabforum.org> >
Subject: RE: Ballot 190 Section 2

 

Essentially, but the issue is not just 39 months. For example, a certificate
issued five years ago (which is before the BRs were required) could use no
validation and still be okay. The documentation for those certs would still
be valid, even if there isn't any. 

 

From: Doug Beattie [mailto:doug.beattie at globalsign.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 12:35 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Validation WG List <validation at cabforum.org
<mailto:validation at cabforum.org> >
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com
<mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com> >
Subject: RE: Ballot 190 Section 2

 

 

The "any other method"  still remains as a valid option and the problem
outlined below is only when this method is removed, correct?  We basically
need to grandfather in validation data collected under method 11 for some
period of time.  Ryan does not want this to be 39 months for all the reasons
he listed.

Is that the crux of the issue?  

Doug

 

 

From: Validation [mailto:validation-bounces at cabforum.org] On Behalf Of
Jeremy Rowley via Validation
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 1:37 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Validation WG List <validation at cabforum.org
<mailto:validation at cabforum.org> >
Cc: Jeremy Rowley <jeremy.rowley at digicert.com
<mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com> >
Subject: [cabf_validation] Ballot 190 Section 2

 

Section 190 was withdrawn because of objections to Section 2 of the ballot:

"This provisions of Ballot Section 1 will apply only to the validation of
domain names occurring after this Ballot 190's effective date.  Validation
of domain names that occurs before this Ballot's effective date and the
resulting validation data may continue to be used for the periods specified
in BR 4.2.1 and EVGL 11.14.3 so long as the validations were conducted in
compliance with the BR Section 3.2.2.4 validation methods in effect at the
time of each validation."

Basically, the browsers would like a date when this cuts off so that old
certificate validation data can't be reused. Any thoughts on how to
reconcile? 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20170424/eca36ef3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4964 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://cabforum.org/pipermail/validation/attachments/20170424/eca36ef3/attachment.bin>