Dear all,
this is a joint response from ETSI ESI and ACABc:

ETSI have published a supplement to its audit requirements specifically to 
address specific requirements of Mozilla, and other CA/Browser Forum members, 
for auditing Trust Service Providers that issue Publicly-Trusted Certificates 
TS 119 403-2.  This is available for download at:
https://www.etsi.org/standards-search#search=TS119403-2 
With regard to the treatment of non-conformities it says in PTA-4.3-08: The 
Audit Attestation shall be issued only if no critical non-conformities are 
identified.

ETSI audits do cover the CA incident management. That includes the whole 
process including the timely treatment of incidents as well how to guarantee 
proper and comprehensive responses to incidents. In ETSI EN 310 401 
corresponding requirements are not only provided directly by section 7.9 
Incident Management but also through the requirement for a ISMS as stated in 
section 5. Assessing that, the ETSI auditor will look at the CA incident 
treatment during the Stage 1 as well as during the Stage 2 onsite part of the 
audit. This includes the treatment of Bugzilla and cert.sh listed issues. 
Incidents closed by the CA may have resulted in a change in the CA operations. 
In such cases the auditor checks that the changes are functioning correctly as 
defined by the CA. In that way the auditor is assessing the incident management 
as such including possible measures taken to avoid such incidents in the future 
and at the implemented measures itself.
 
Another matter is the question of how to handle security related incidents and 
the counter measures taken by a CA in audit reports. In order to keep the 
security issue confidential as well as the details of the measures taken by the 
CA, the accredited CABS (ETSI auditors) decided to document such findings in 
their detailed audit reports. These detailed reports list all relevant non 
conformities and the counter measures taken by the CA. It is handed over to the 
CA in addition to the audit attestation. Based upon that detailed report, the 
ETSI auditor will compile the Audit Attestation as the browsers have it in 
their hand. The contents of the Audit Attestation as summary document was 
agreed upon between ACAB’c and the CA/B Browser Forum. If you regard it helpful 
to add information about the audit results gained in the area of the CA 
incident treatment, we can certainly discuss that. We then should reach a 
common agreement on what exactly we add. 
 
We certainly believe however, that it is not advisable to publish detected weak 
points. E.g. there might be findings in the way that the CA has NOT correctly 
treated an incident. In that case the ETSI auditor will document such findings 
and will not issue a positive report as well as no Audit Attestation. The CA is 
then obliged to immediately install appropriate counter measures which again 
will be judged by the auditor. Only if the counter measures are rated 
sufficient in coverage and suitability by the auditor, he will issue a positive 
report and an Audit Attestation.

Regards
Clemens
_______________________________________________
dev-security-policy mailing list
dev-security-policy@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-security-policy

Reply via email to