It would seem better for Mozilla users if it was a MUST. A SHOULD is an
interesting starting point, but I’m not sure it does anything to help
members of the community here, and there don’t seem to be clear arguments
against it.

The benefit, of course, is attempting to ensure better consistency and
aligning with the needs of Mozilla, which accredited CABs alone are not
necessarily qualified nor incentivized to do, but at least ACAB-c has been
willing to try.

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 10:53 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:

> I am proposing that we make this a "SHOULD".  ETSI auditors SHOULD be
> members of ACAB'c.
>
> See draft language here:
>
> https://github.com/BenWilson-Mozilla/pkipolicy/commit/01f15d4bc2cebfedd140dcb3285f50f6216984b8
>
> "ETSI auditors SHOULD be members of the [Accredited Conformity Assessment
> Bodies' Council][ACAB'c link].  WebTrust auditors MUST be [enrolled in
> the WebTrust program][WebTrust link]."
>
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 5:06 PM Moudrick Dadashov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> With all due respect to ACAB-c,  currently the term CAB means a
>> proffesional accredited by NAB.
>>
>> I'd suggest to consult with the legal department if the proposed
>> requirement comply with Article 11 ( Freedom of assembly and association)
>> of European Convention  on Human Rights:
>>
>> 1.  Everyone  has  the  right  to  freedom  of  peaceful  assembly  and
>> to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to
>> join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
>>
>> 2.  No restrictions shall be placed  on the exercise of  these rights
>> other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic
>> society in the interests  of national security  or public safety, for the
>> prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or
>> for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This Article shall
>> not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions  on the exercise of these
>> rights by members  of the armed forces, of the police or of the
>> administration of the State.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> M.D.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2021, 00:37 Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> This email starts discussion of whether ETSI auditors should be required
>>> to be members of the Accredited Conformity Assessment Bodies' Council
>>> (“ACAB’c” - https://www.acab-c.com/).
>>>
>>> This is Issue #219 <https://github.com/mozilla/pkipolicy/issues/219>
>>> for the Mozilla Root Store Policy (MSRP), version 2.8, to be published in
>>> 2022. (See https://github.com/mozilla/pkipolicy/labels/2.8)
>>>
>>> Mozilla continually seeks to improve the quality of CA audits.
>>> Therefore, we are considering a requirement that ETSI auditors be members
>>> of the ACAB’c, for which there is no cost to join. The ACAB’c has
>>> improved the consistency in how audit reports are provided to Mozilla,
>>> including how auditor qualifications are verified. (ACAB’c seeks “to
>>> harmonise the application of the conformity assessment requirements … with
>>> regard to the broader conformity assessment community and in partnership
>>> with the main stakeholders of the area, such as [the] CA/Browser Forum ….”
>>> Members of the ACAB’c further undertake to meet “the minimum report
>>> content for … Browsers Manufacturers”.  (Code of Conduct, found at
>>> https://www.acab-c.com/terms-conditions-and-policies/.) Not only has
>>> ACAB’c maintained a Mozilla-compliant audit attestation letter template,
>>> but it has also provided guidance about what auditors are supposed to
>>> check, and it has taken other steps to keep audits current with Mozilla and
>>> CA/Browser Forum requirements.
>>>
>>>
>>> From an audit quality standpoint, membership in the ACAB'c is necessary
>>> for any auditor using ETSI criteria to review CAs that issue publicly
>>> trusted server certificates, and therefore, ACAB'c membership should be a
>>> requirement stated in the MRSP.
>>>
>>>
>>> Please provide your responses and comments in this thread.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>>
>>> Ben Wilson
>>>
>>> Mozilla Root Store Program
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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/CA%2B1gtaYuv_0Zy4LZnxPkmbg9EGft6AtT3AXSSUM2Es7VWuUPgw%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaYuv_0Zy4LZnxPkmbg9EGft6AtT3AXSSUM2Es7VWuUPgw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>> .
>>>
>> --
> 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/CA%2B1gtaatREgzCtG2AMzhs_ObG-P3YSi9mDSSfFJOA7sOWMdgDA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaatREgzCtG2AMzhs_ObG-P3YSi9mDSSfFJOA7sOWMdgDA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
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/CAErg%3DHG2a%2BrLvYeQTKX215QeeoHMrOX9buroT7U3czNYZY6mgg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to