Ben:

Did I miss Andrew’s remarks being addressed? Or did you see them not as
concerning as we did?

On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 5:07 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:

> All,
>
> Today I read through the Certainly CP/CPS and reviewed the Compliance
> Self-Assessment and GoDaddy's review documents. I did not see anything in
> the CP/CPS that did not conform to the Mozilla Root Store Policy or the
> CA/B Forum's Baseline Requirements.
>
> I also looked at the GoDaddy-Fastly cross-certificate profiles and did not
> see anything that concerned me.
>
> The public comment period will close next Wednesday, 9-Mar-2022.  Please
> provide any additional comments you may have by then.
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
> Ben
>
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:43 PM 'Brittany Randall' via
> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Regarding the GoDaddy CP/CPS review of Certainly, we have attached the
>> following review artifacts to Bug 1755851
>> <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1755851>:
>>
>>    - Attachment Compendium.pdf
>>    - CPCPSReviewTracker.xlsx
>>    - CSAReview.zip (contains three files)
>>    - FastlyWebTrustAuditReportReview.zip (contains seven files)
>>
>> The first document, “Attachment Compendium.pdf” provides details and
>> additional context for the remaining three attachments uploaded. Also, for
>> reference, Certainly has published version 1.3 of the Certainly CP/CPS to
>> https://certainly.com/repository/
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Brittany Randall
>>
>> On Friday, February 25, 2022 at 9:06:08 AM UTC-7 Brittany Randall wrote:
>>
>>> We can provide some of our review documentation. I'll shoot to have
>>> something early next week. I'll plan to add any attachments to the bug, but
>>> will reply in this discussion to let folks know items are there.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Brittany
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 22, 2022 at 2:12:50 AM UTC-7 [email protected]
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 21/2/2022 3:28 π.μ., Ryan Sleevi wrote:
>>>> > This speaks to Dimitris' point, or perhaps misunderstanding, about
>>>> the
>>>> > root inclusion process. The suggestion of there being simply a three
>>>> > week review process overlooks the significant, and transparent,
>>>> > vetting that occurs on the CCADB Case and Bugzilla issue prior to
>>>> > acceptance, including, as has been previously mentioned, the detailed
>>>> > CP/CPS review by someone who regularly performs CP/CPS reviews, and
>>>> > with a vested interested towards protecting users. The incentives,
>>>> > process, and outcomes are all radically different with respect to
>>>> > subordination, and yet the risks are, at best, the same, or as
>>>> > previously highlighted, even greater than those risks of a root (due
>>>> > to shared fate).
>>>>
>>>> I would like to remind people that before Mozilla adopted the great
>>>> practice for detailed CP/CPS reviews by its own staff (with the
>>>> unquestionable incentives, experience that Ryan mentioned), the Mozilla
>>>> community contributed to these CP/CPS reviews. Members of the
>>>> community,
>>>> including people associated with CAs and Browsers, were performing
>>>> reviews (perhaps not as detailed as the ones performed during the last
>>>> 2
>>>> years) and technical checks (for example CRLs, OCSP and other "publicly
>>>> visible" technical elements).
>>>>
>>>> My point is that we should not outright consider CA reviews as
>>>> non-trusted. In fact, any review is useful especially if it is publicly
>>>> disclosed. This is also supported in
>>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA/Application_Verification#Public_discussion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If GoDaddy has performed such an analysis in Certainly's CP/CPS, I
>>>> would
>>>> recommend its disclosure to this request so that members can
>>>> independently assess. It would also help Ben with his review during the
>>>> Root inclusion request process.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>> 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/d73a51c1-5f68-4626-b4a7-ea3643747a19n%40mozilla.org
>> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/d73a51c1-5f68-4626-b4a7-ea3643747a19n%40mozilla.org?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%2B1gtaYTK4SA2h6f3ej8hGifT-7-EyWVaJd-z0nbwE3s%2BFoUCg%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaYTK4SA2h6f3ej8hGifT-7-EyWVaJd-z0nbwE3s%2BFoUCg%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%3DHGMhUP7v0%2BL4%2Bo2%2BMyMp8e7jdLVO2f%3Dgr43fg0_A2xqGA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to