TrustCor Systems does not use SHA1 for signing of SMIME certificates, 
ARLs/CRLs, and OCSP responses and would be open to any sunset date. We do 
support SHA1 hash-types in our OCSP responses.

Joanna Fox
Head of Digital Certificate Compliance

On Monday, February 7, 2022 at 9:59:47 AM UTC-7 Jeremy Rowley wrote:

> DigiCert supports banning SHA1 across the board. We are no longer 
> supporting SHA1 signatures for services related to certs trusted by 
> Mozilla. 
>
>  
>
> Jeremy
>
> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of 
> *Ben Wilson
> *Sent:* Monday, February 7, 2022 9:43 AM
> *To:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: Policy 2.8: MRSP Issue #178: Sunset SHA1
>
>  
>
> I feel we need additional input here from Certification Authorities who 
> have not yet responded.
>
>  
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2022 at 2:08 PM Rob Stradling <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Sectigo currently still "sign[s] SHA-1 hashes over CRLs for roots and 
> intermediates only if they have issued SHA-1 certificates", as permitted by 
> https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/governance/policies/security-group/certs/policy/#513-sha-1
> .
>
>  
>
> It would require very little effort for us to reconfigure these roots and 
> intermediates so that they use SHA-256 instead.
>
>  
>
> We expect that switching to SHA-256 will bring minimal, perhaps even zero, 
> disruption to relying parties.  Therefore, we'll be happy with whatever 
> sunset date Mozilla chooses.
>
>  
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of 
> Ben Wilson <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* 02 February 2022 03:59
> *To:* Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]>
> *Cc:* [email protected] <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: Policy 2.8: MRSP Issue #178: Sunset SHA1 
>
>  
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not 
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know 
> the content is safe.
>
>  
>
> I have emailed CAs in the Mozilla program asking them to respond here.
>
>  
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 12:41 PM Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  
>
>  
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:00 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> See responses inline below.
>
>  
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 11:12 PM Ryan Sleevi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It’s not clear: what situations make it appropriate for a CA 
> communication, versus discussion here?
>
>  
>
> Yes.  It is preferable that discussion take place here. However, a survey 
> would still be public, as they have been in the past, and the CCADB would 
> collect all of the responses in a table format.
>
>  
>
> Oh, for sure :) I just know that the surveys have historically had delays 
> or had confusion by CAs in interpreting questions, and the survey approach 
> somewhat predates the m.d.s.p. participation requirement. I totally realize 
> that it has benefits for bringing direct awareness, but I raise it to try 
> and understand if the expectation is to always have the two parallel paths 
> for soliciting feedback, or if it might just be sufficient to email blast 
> CAs to say "Hey, here's the discussion, to send feedback, please 
> participate here". That, I think, might achieve the goal of highlighting 
> the importance, while still centralizing some of the conversation :) Just a 
> thought
>
>  
>
> -- 
> 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%2B1gtab2Kvq5i%3D6bzPDaMpguUJFx68MMRSnJMw1s_HDCZ8X9rA%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fa%2Fmozilla.org%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fdev-security-policy%2FCA%252B1gtab2Kvq5i%253D6bzPDaMpguUJFx68MMRSnJMw1s_HDCZ8X9rA%2540mail.gmail.com%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=04%7C01%7Crob%40sectigo.com%7C3f3a63b6d9e04ec7c36a08d9e6006f24%7C0e9c48946caa465d96604b6968b49fb7%7C0%7C0%7C637793712875801542%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=2K%2BxNilZtKPx94L1dmj%2Fk3HHRUBTeFknWRmsvrTR550%3D&reserved=0>
> .
>
> -- 
> 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%2B1gtabsr__yskc6K8%2BDc%3DOQGYp5C-mQBanqeBm67-R3qOQi_w%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtabsr__yskc6K8%2BDc%3DOQGYp5C-mQBanqeBm67-R3qOQi_w%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/5f506231-d30a-434c-9448-46be5097ae23n%40mozilla.org.

Reply via email to