See
https://github.com/BenWilson-Mozilla/pkipolicy/commit/55066357d674adb8da4b8ee20b5cd60cf2b6f8bd

On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:26 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:

> OK - thanks.
>
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 3:58 PM Andrew Ayer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think Jacob's language (with your change to use "final certificate")
>> is good and would be OK replacing the first bullet with it.  I'm also
>> OK with leaving the first bullet, but it seems redundant with the
>> new and improved language.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andrew
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 15:48:34 -0600
>> Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Jacob and Andrew,
>> >
>> > What if I just added this underlined language without replacing the
>> > first bullet?
>> >
>> > "Precertificates are in-scope for enforcing compliance with these
>> > requirements.  *It is mississuance to issue a final certificate based
>> > on a precertificate if they do not exactly match each other according
>> > to RFC 6962 section 3.1. A final certificate is 'based on' a
>> > precertificate if they have the same serial and issuer, or they have
>> > the same serial and the final certificate's issuer matches the
>> > precertificate's issuer's issuer.* Thus,  ..."
>> >
>> > Ben
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 3:07 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Should it say "final certificate" in this bullet?
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 11:15 AM Jacob Hoffman-Andrews <
>> > > [email protected]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 6:19 AM Andrew Ayer <[email protected]>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> As I understand it, the goal of this bullet point is not to add an
>> > >>> exception to misissuance, but to make sure that there is zero
>> > >>> ambiguity that incidents like the following are misissuances:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1677737
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> This is useful context, thanks. FWIW, I don't think the current
>> > >> wording achieves that goal, since it is still quite hard to parse,
>> > >> even for someone who understands the requirements and how they
>> > >> interact.
>> > >>
>> > >> Here's another take:
>> > >>
>> > >>  - "It is mississuance to issue a certificate based on a
>> > >> precertificate if they do not exactly match each other according
>> > >> to RFC 6962 section 3.1. A certificate is 'based on' a
>> > >> precertificate if they have the same serial and issuer, or they
>> > >> have the same serial and the certificate's issuer matches the
>> > >> precertificate's issuer's issuer."
>> > >>
>> > >
>>
>

-- 
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%2B1gtabXxfbhPQKvVEjR50-c_FTDFJk4xq3oQgoa_cB444ivsg%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to