Both publicly and privately, we've expressed our concerns to the Ballot authors and endorsers regarding Section 2 and its legitimacy to impact any operations of the Forum.
These concerns were raised in https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-April/010301.html , echoed in https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-April/010327.html , and a key factor in our determination of vote, as discussed in https://cabforum.org/pipermail/public/2017-April/010558.html We remain deeply concerned by this attempt to redefine misissuance in a way that is beneficial to CAs, and in a way inconsistent with Section 2.2 of the Baseline Requirements. CAs are obligated to "publicly give effect to these Requirements and represent that it will adhere to the latest published version." As such, Section 2's resolution has no force or effect on the evaluation of the Baseline Requirements or its requirements. There are ways to resolve this. Section 2 is not that way.
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
