DigiCert votes “yes”
From: Erwann Abalea [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 6:25 AM To: [email protected] Cc: Barreira Iglesias, Iñigo <[email protected]>; Ben Wilson <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [cabfpub] ballot 171-updating ETSI Standards in CABF documents DocuSign votes Yes to ballot 171. Cordialement, Erwann Abalea Le 24 juin 2016 à 17:56, Ben Wilson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > a écrit : I’ve updated the text in GitHub and in so doing made a few minor grammatical changes to the proposed revision of section 17.4 of the EV Guidelines so that it would read as follows: (4) If the CA does not have a currently valid WebTrust Seal of Assurance for CAs or an ETSI TS 102 042 EVCP audit or an ETSI EN 319 411-1 audit for EVCP policy, then, before issuing EV Certificates, the CA and its Root CA MUST successfully complete either: (i) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust for CA Program, or (ii) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust EV Program, the ETSI TS 102 042 EVCP, or the ETSI EN 319 411-1 for EVCP policy. IMHO – I think we could start voting on the revised ballot at 2200 UTC because the changes to the language have been relatively minor since the ballot was released last week. Ben From: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Barreira Iglesias, Iñigo Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 4:47 AM To: ' <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]' < <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> Subject: [cabfpub] ballot 171-updating ETSI Standards in CABF documents Hi, This is how the ballot will look like accepting the changes proposed by Erwann. As this has been done during the review period, and then the changes accepted during this period, would be enough to resubmit again as it is, or should we go thru another review period of 1 week. I´m not familiar with the procedure so if it´s ok as it´s now, the voting period will start tonight I think. Regards Ballot 171 – Updating the ETSI standards in the CABF documents The following motion has been proposed by Iñigo Barreira of Izenpe and endorsed by Mads Henriksveen of Buypass, Jochem van den Berge of Logius PKIoverheid and Arno Fiedler of D-trust -- MOTION BEGINS – In the BRs, In section 1.6.3 References, change: ETSI TS 119 403, Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Trust Service Provider Conformity Assessment ‐ General Requirements and Guidance. With ETSI EN 319 403, Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Trust Service Provider Conformity Assessment - Requirements for conformity assessment bodies assessing Trust Service Providers and add: ETSI EN 319 411-1, Electronic Signatures and Infrastructures (ESI); Policy and security requirements for Trust Service Providers issuing certificates; Part 1: General requirements In section 8.2 Identity/qualification of assessor, point 4, change: 4. (For audits conducted in accordance with any one of the ETSI standards) accredited in accordance with ETSI TS 119 403, or accredited to conduct such audits under an equivalent national scheme, or accredited by a national accreditation body in line with ISO 27006 to carry out ISO 27001 audits; With 4. (For audits conducted in accordance with any one of the ETSI standards) accredited in accordance with ISO 17065 applying the requirements specified in ETSI EN 319 403; In section 8.4 Topics covered by assessment, point 2, change: 2. A national scheme that audits conformance to ETSI TS 102 042; With 2. A national scheme that audits conformance to ETSI TS 102 042/ ETSI EN 319 411-1; In the EV guidelines, In section 8.2.1 Implementation, point (B), change: (B) Implement the requirements of (i) the then-current WebTrust Program for CAs, and (ii) the then-current WebTrust EV Program or ETSI TS 102 042; and With (B) Implement the requirements of (i) the then-current WebTrust Program for CAs, and (ii) the then-current WebTrust EV Program or ETSI TS 102 042 for EVCP or ETSI EN 319 411-1 for EVCP policy; and In section 8.2.2 Disclosure, change: The CA is also REQUIRED to publicly disclose its CA business practices as required by both WebTrust for CAs and ETSI TS 102 042. With The CA is also REQUIRED to publicly disclose its CA business practices as required by WebTrust for CAs and ETSI TS 102 042 and ETSI EN 319 411-1. In section 17.1 Eligible audit schemes, point (ii), change: (ii) ETSI TS 102 042 audit With (ii) ETSI TS 102 042 audit for EVCP, or (iii) ETSI EN 319 411-1 audit for EVCP policy In section 17.4 pre-issuance readiness audit, after point (2), add: (3) If the CA has a currently valid ETSI EN 319 411-1 audit for EVCP policy, then, before issuing EV Certificates, the CA and its Root CA MUST successfully complete a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against ETSI EN 319 411-1 for EVCP. and change: (3) If the CA does not have a currently valid WebTrust Seal of Assurance for CAs or an ETSI 102 042 audit, then, before issuing EV Certificates, the CA and its Root CA MUST successfully complete either: (i) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust for CA Program, or (ii) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust EV Program, or an ETSI TS 102 042 audit. With (4) If the CA does not have a currently valid WebTrust Seal of Assurance for CAs or or an ETSI TS 102 042 EVCP or an ETSI EN 319 411-1 audit for EVCP policy, then, before issuing EV Certificates, the CA and its Root CA MUST successfully complete either: (i) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust for CA Program, or (ii) a point-in-time readiness assessment audit against the WebTrust EV Program, or an ETSI TS 102 042 EVCP, or an ETSI EN 319 411-1 for EVCP policy. -- MOTION ENDS -- The review period for this ballot shall commence at 2200 UTC on 17 June 2016, and will close at 2200 UTC on 24 June 2016. Unless the motion is withdrawn during the review period, the voting period will start immediately thereafter and will close at 2200 UTC on 1 July 2016. Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread. A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear 'yes' in the response. A vote against must indicate a clear 'no' in the response. A vote to abstain must indicate a clear 'abstain' in the response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting member before the close of the voting period will be counted. Voting members are listed here: <https://cabforum.org/members/> https://cabforum.org/members/ In order for the motion to be adopted, two thirds or more of the votes cast by members in the CA category and greater than 50% of the votes cast by members in the browser category must be in favor. Quorum is currently ten (10) members– at least ten members must participate in the ballot, either by voting in favor, voting against, or abstaining. Iñigo Barreira Responsable del Área técnica <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] 945067705 <image002.jpg> ERNE! Baliteke mezu honen zatiren bat edo mezu osoa legez babestuta egotea. Mezua badu bere hartzailea. Okerreko helbidera heldu bada (helbidea gaizki idatzi, transmisioak huts egin) eman abisu igorleari, korreo honi erantzuna. KONTUZ! ATENCION! Este mensaje contiene informacion privilegiada o confidencial a la que solo tiene derecho a acceder el destinatario. Si usted lo recibe por error le agradeceriamos que no hiciera uso de la informacion y que se pusiese en contacto con el remitente. _______________________________________________ Public mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public> https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
