On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 9:13 AM Henri Sivonen via dev-security-policy <
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org> wrote:

> (Mozilla hat off.)
> After reading about the California versus Delaware thing when it comes
> to the certificate for stripe.com, out of curiosity, I took a fresh
> look at the ISO 3166-1 code in the EV certificates of some of the
> banks that operate in Finland. (Result: https://www.nordea.fi/ is SE,
> https://www.handelsbanken.fi/ is SE but https://danskebank.fi/ is FI
> and not DK.)
> While at it, I noticed that the certificate for
> https://www.saastopankki.fi/ is an OV cert whose O field says
> "Saastopankkiliitto osk". However, according to
> https://tietopalvelu.ytj.fi/yritystiedot.aspx?yavain=25460&tarkiste=F663C7B776290379F1DAB6A4E251EE3FA727742A
> , the trade name of the entity is "Säästöpankkiliitto osk". It also
> has parallel trade names "Sparbanksförbundet anl" (Swedish translation
> of the primary name) and "Savings Banks' Union Coop" (English
> translation of the primary name) and auxiliary trade names
> "Säästöpankkikeskus" and "Sparbankscentralen". But no
> "Saastopankkiliitto osk".
> While I don't think there is any risk of confusion in this particular
> case[1], I'm wondering: What in the Baseline Requirements authorizes
> DigiCert to omit the diaereses from the trade name?
> The Baseline Requirements have this to say: "If present, the
> subject:organizationName field MUST contain either the Subject’s name
> or DBA as verified under Section The CA may include
> information in this field that differs slightly from the verified
> name, such as common variations or abbreviations, provided that the CA
> documents the difference and any abbreviations used are locally
> accepted abbreviations; e.g., if the official record shows “Company
> Name Incorporated”, the CA MAY use “Company Name Inc.” or “Company
> Name”."
> The variation covered by the example would have authorized the use of
> the abbreviation "osk" had the registered name contained "osuuskunta"
> (but it contained "osk" to begin with) or to drop "osk".
> Is it documented anywhere what transformations other than ones that
> are analogous to transforming "Incorporated" to "Inc." (or dropping
> it) are acceptable as differing "slightly"?

No. It is presently up to the CA and the Auditor, if the Auditor happens to
examine that certificate. Otherwise it’s left up to the RA and their
ability to follow the CA’s policies - presuming they have them documented,
and not just a blanket waiver like you cited.

In the Finnish language, ä
> and ö are considered to be distinct letters from a and o (so distinct
> that they sort to the end of the alphabet), so from that perspective,
> one could argue that the transformation is not "slight" for trade
> names themselves even though it is customary for transforming trade
> names into domain names[1].
> Clearly, this isn't a matter of technical limitation, because DigiCert
> was able to put "Ålandsbanken Abp" in the O field of the cert for
> https://www.alandsbanken.fi/ .
> [1] https://www.saastopankki.fi/ is the primary address to which
> http://säästöpankki.fi/ <http://xn--sstpankki-v2aa2t.fi/> (but not
> https!) redirects. Web site operators
> in Finland generally prefer interoperability with non-IDN-cabable
> usage over correct spelling.
> --
> Henri Sivonen
> hsivo...@hsivonen.fi
> https://hsivonen.fi/
> _______________________________________________
> dev-security-policy mailing list
> dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy
dev-security-policy mailing list

Reply via email to