Thanks, PeterBelow I’m relying on the Mozilla policy (MP) published 
here:https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/security-group/certs/policy/You
 say you are confused and looks like because of following:1.  Telia Finland Oyj 
is part of Swedish company “Telia Company AB” (BusinessID 5561034249).Please 
note Telia Finland Oyj is a legal entity with its own BusinessID, 
material/human resources, management and location (see MP  section 3.1.4 
(13)).As "CAs SHOULD NOT assume that trust is transferable" (MP section 8), 
using the MP terminology the relationship between Telia Company AB and Telia 
Finland Oyj is "legal ownership". Feel free to rely on any privileges the 
policy assumes for this kind of ownership parties.The reason of confuse is 
mixing two different terms "legal omwnership" and "CA operations" (as in MP 
section 8.2).2. "It also seems clear to me that Telia Company AB has overall 
control ofthe CA operations, as they are the responsible party as documented 
inthe WebTrust management assertion and addressed in the auditor'sopinion."See, 
this needs to be clear not only to highly skilled professional like yourself, 
but also to relying parties. I’ve no problem with Telia Company AB or Telia 
Finland Oyj being a CA, however I have big problem for both of them pretending 
to be PKI participant with undisclosed roles - in this context ”has overall 
control” is misunderstanding, again, see MP section 8.2.************I’m afraid 
your good example below is not applicable to this case - those companies, If I 
understood correctly, have contractual relationship, whereas in our case all we 
have is "is part of" which means the legal owner (Telia Company AB) controls 
shares of another legal entity (Telia Finland Oyj). This has nothing to do with 
CA operations.Thanks,M.D.
-------- Original message --------From: Peter Bowen <[email protected]> Date: 
1/10/22  19:37  (GMT+02:00) To: "Moudrick M. Dadashov" <[email protected]> Cc: 
"[email protected]" <[email protected]>, 
[email protected], "[email protected]" 
<[email protected]>, Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> Subject: Re: FW: RE: 
Public Discussion: Inclusion of Telia Root CA v2 On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 7:08 
AM 'Moudrick M. Dadashov' [email protected] 
<[email protected]>wrote:>> Hi Pekka,>> Before your claim can be 
finalized, we need clarification of the terms in your statement:>>> 
"Specifically that Telia hasn't used any third party RAs except in the 
mentioned client certificate cases".>> You explained earlier that Telia is a 
trademark that Telia Finland Oyj is authorized to use in Finland.>> In the 
Telia's Management Assertion Telia Company AB uses the term Telia as a self 
short name. The same short name is used in the audit reports.>> So, based on 
the official documents, we don't know which legal entity represent the CA - 
Telia Company AB (Sweden) or Telia Finland Oyj (Finland). Once we identify the 
CA, it should be easier for you to disclose/identify other PKI participants, if 
any.>> "And that all other RA functions were operated internally by the Telia 
group so that all internal RA functions were covered under the WebTrust 
audit.">> Here you use the terms "internally" and "group" that have no meaning  
in the context of the CA operations - if you think they are defined in existing 
standards and Mozilla policy, just refer us to the  appropriate sources.>> Once 
again, as from the CA operations' (CP/CPS) point of view Telia Company AB and 
Telia Finland Oyj are two different legal entities, you need to disclose their 
PKI participant roles as required by all applicable standards, policies I 
quoted earlier.Moudrick,I'm afraid I'm somewhat confused.  Mozilla Policy calls 
out two placeswhere the legal entity has to be disclosed: "ownership or control 
ofthe CA’s certificate(s)" and "ownership or control of the CA’soperations".  
I'm going to assume that the first really should be CA'sprivate keys, but that 
is something for a policy discussion.The CPS says "The CA operating in 
compliance with this CPS is TeliaCA. The legal entity responsible of Telia CA 
is Finnish company “TeliaFinland Oyj” (BusinessID 1475607-9). Telia Finland Oyj 
is part ofSwedish company “Telia Company AB” (BusinessID 5561034249)."From this 
thread, it seems clear to me that Telia Finland Oyj hasownership of the CA 
certificate and keys.  This has been statedmultiple times in the thread.It also 
seems clear to me that Telia Company AB has overall control ofthe CA 
operations, as they are the responsible party as documented inthe WebTrust 
management assertion and addressed in the auditor'sopinion.I am unaware of any 
requirement in the Mozilla policy (directly or viainclusion by reference) that 
requires a CA to disclose the employer ofall people they contract to assist in 
operations of the CA.  Thisapplies regardless of whether the employer(s) are 
Affiliates of thelegal entity operating the CA, Affiliates of the legal entity 
owningthe private keys, or independent third parties.  The thing thatmatters is 
that the entity operating the CA takes responsibility forand has control over 
the actions undertaken by the people operatingthe CA.As an example, as I 
understand it, if Afla, Inc. owns a private key,they can contract Bravo Ltd. to 
operate the CA (including RAfunctions).  Bravo Ltd would then be listed as the 
responsible partyin the WebTrust audit report.  Bravo can contract Charlie Pty 
Ltd,Delta GmbH, and Echo BV to assist in the operations of the CA.  Thiscould 
include providing physical security for the private keys,providing ICT 
administration, applicant review services, or otherwork.  As long as Bravo is 
has oversight and control of theoperations, it is not necessary to list 
Charlie, Delta, or Echo in theCPS nor in the WebTrust audit report.I do realize 
that other regulations and requirements may requiredisclosure of some or all of 
Charlie, Delta, or Echo.  For example,some CAs disclose information 
sub-processors for the purpose ofcomplying with GDPR; 
seehttps://www.globalsign.com/en/repository/GlobalSign-Subprocessors.pdfas an 
example.  This is independent of the Mozilla requirements, tothe best of my 
knowledge.Thanks,Peter(my personal view and does not necessarily reflect the 
views of anyone else)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"[email protected]" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/61dc838b.1c69fb81.97bdb.f268SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING%40mx.google.com.

Reply via email to