Ian G wrote:
One way to deal with the "paid independent third party"
approach is to simply have the party(s) declare how much
was paid.  This will probably raise some eyebrows, but I
can't think why this wouldn't work.

Well, I don't think E&Y or KPMG are going to be willing to send me their invoices, but I think this approach is worth considering for CAs that take the "plan B" approach and use an evaluator that's not an accounting firm, government-authorized test lab, etc. This also addresses the question of how we'd determine things like whether expenses paid to a volunteer evaluator were "necessary and reasonable".


You didn't suggest possible language for the next draft, but here's some:

  8. By "independent third party" we mean a person or other entity who
     is not affiliated with the CA as an employee or director, and for
     whom at least one of the following statements is true:

     * the party is not financially compensated by the CA;
     * the nature and amount of the party's financial compensation by
       the CA is fully and publicly disclosed; or
     * the party is bound by law, regulation, and/or a professional code
       of ethics to render an honest and objective judgement regarding
       the CA.

Thoughts?

Frank

P.S. Note that I will probably publish draft 9 tomorrow; I have one other significant change I am considering, as noted in my next message.

--
Frank Hecker
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
mozilla-crypto mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto

Reply via email to