Kurt,
I'll see if there is anything I can provide that might be helpful.
Ben

On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:37 AM Kurt Seifried <[email protected]> wrote:

> Can you share/link the Mozilla processes for verifying these
> documents/ownership/etc?
>
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 10:19 AM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Kurt,
>>
>> I'm moving this to its own subject line.
>>
>> The verification stage (prior to placing an inclusion case in the public
>> discussion queue) looks at whether the CA has provided the information.
>>
>> Some information about equitable ownership is usually provided in the
>> CA's Value Justification document. Additionally, a review of information
>> available online from government sources is used to determine/confirm the
>> official legal name of the entity. However, we could do a better job at
>> determining the equitable ownership and corporate relationships of CAs, if
>> that is what you're getting at. For instance, press releases are sometimes
>> a good source of information about majority shareholders.
>>
>> As you observe, it can get very complicated.
>>
>> Ben
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 10, 2022 at 3:40 PM Kurt Seifried <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the problem is that I look at statements like:
>>>
>>> The person conducting initial information verification uses the CCADB to
>>> check the completeness of information about:
>>> the CA owner,
>>> the CA's auditor,
>>>
>>> These are very non-trivial things to verify and prove, witness
>>> Trustcor's auditor maybe or maybe not being accredited at the time of the
>>> audit. Ownership is nigh impossible to prove, e.g. Corp A owns the CA, but
>>> what if a majority of Corp A's (unlisted) voting shares are held by a set
>>> of companies that are actually interlocking?
>>>
>>> I guess what I'd like to see is "HOW" not just "WHAT", e.g. HOW do I
>>> validate who owns the CA? HOW is the community supposed to accomplish these
>>> things?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 1:01 PM Ben Wilson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kurt,
>>>> With regard to Mozilla's process, here is some helpful information:
>>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA/Application_Verification#Public_Discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Is this the kind of information you were looking for?  If so, then
>>>> we'll be copying similar text, with enhancements, over to the CCADB.org
>>>> website (without the Mozilla-specific language), as further guidance.
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:43 AM Kurt Seifried <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Question: Are there any guidelines for bringing up concerns or
>>>>> structuring arguments/evidence both in favor and against a new CA being
>>>>> included? All the web page says:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA
>>>>>
>>>>> Mozilla's dev-security-policy (MDSP) mailing list is used for
>>>>> discussions of Mozilla policies related to security in general and CAs in
>>>>> particular, and for wider discussions about the WebPKI. Among other 
>>>>> things,
>>>>> it is the preferred forum for the public-comment phase of CA evaluation. 
>>>>> If
>>>>> you are a regular participant in MDSP, then please add your name to the
>>>>> Policy Participants page.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:39 AM Ben Wilson <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As previously announced, public discussions of root inclusion
>>>>>> requests will be taking place on the CCADB public list. Public discussion
>>>>>> of a request for inclusion by SERPRO is taking place there now through 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> end of the year. Here is a link to the relevant thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/a/ccadb.org/g/public/c/Mux855BsRg4/m/VVoTWfmQHgAJ
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Following public discussion, I will post a summary of the discussion
>>>>>> on the CCADB Public list.  At that point, public discussion will move to
>>>>>> this list (m-d-s-p) for a one-week "last call" period. (See Step 7 in 
>>>>>> the Application
>>>>>> Process <https://wiki.mozilla.org/CA/Application_Process>)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ben
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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%2B1gtaZSDBhOfWPb5UmrgF0bwCNC3eSD-fCY7Rqt04sEEBmLSw%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/d/msgid/dev-security-policy/CA%2B1gtaZSDBhOfWPb5UmrgF0bwCNC3eSD-fCY7Rqt04sEEBmLSw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Kurt Seifried (He/Him)
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Kurt Seifried (He/Him)
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Kurt Seifried (He/Him)
> [email protected]
>

-- 
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%2B1gtaYem7xgUd_ShwubW9VwU30uFhm9igkyOBoFNKT6vOsngA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to