On 8/7/2017 8:09 PM, Jonathan Rudenberg wrote:
>> On May 17, 2017, at 07:24, Gervase Markham via dev-security-policy
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On 16/05/17 02:26, userwithuid wrote:
>>> After skimming the responses and checking a few CAs, I'm starting to
>>> wonder: Wouldn't it be easier to just add another mandatory field to
>>> the CCADB (e..g. "revocation contact"), requiring $URL or $EMAIL via
>>> policy and just use that to provide a public list?
>> Well, such contacts are normally per CA rather than per root. I guess we
>> could add it on the CA's entry.
> I’ve been reporting a fair amount of misissuance this week, and the responses
> to the Problem Reporting question in the April CA communication leave a lot
> to be desired. Several CAs do not have any contact details at all, and others
> require filling forms with captchas.
> I think it’d be very useful if CAs were required maintain a problem reporting
> email address and keep it current in the CCADB, this requirement could go in
> the Mozilla Root Store policy or the CCADB policy. If they want to also
> maintain other modes of contact, they can but no matter what an email address
> should be required.
I think that a public point of contact for a certification authority was
a requirement under Mozilla's policy. I cannot find such a requirement
now unless the Baseline Requirements, which are included by reference in
Mozilla's policy, require it.
David E. Ross
President Trump demands loyalty to himself from Republican members
of Congress. I always thought that members of Congress -- House
and Senate -- were required to be loyal to the people of the
United States. In any case, they all swore an oath of office
to be loyal to the Constitution.
dev-security-policy mailing list