GDCA votes “YES” to ballot 199.
Yongqiang ZHANG
Global Digital Cybersecurity Authority CO., LTD.
E-mail:[email protected]
原始邮件
发件人:张翼 via [email protected]
收件人:'CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List'[email protected]
抄送:张翼[email protected]
发送时间:2017年5月8日(周一) 17:38
主题:[cabfpub] Reply Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root andIntermediate
Certificates
CFCA votes YES on ballot 199.
Zhang Yi
发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表
xiongyuanyuan via Public
发送时间: 2017年5月8日 14:03
收件人: 'CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List'
抄送: xiongyuanyuan
主题: [cabfpub] 答复: Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
SHECA votes YES on ballot 199.
Ruby Xiong
Shanghai Electronic Certification Authority co., ltd.
18F, No.1717, North Sichuan Road, Shanghai, China
Tel：+86-21-36393197
Email：[email protected]
发件人: Public [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Gervase Markham via Public
发送时间: Friday, May 5, 2017 9:23 PM
收件人: CABFPub
抄送: Gervase Markham
主题: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is currently
in the voting period (voting ends on 9th May).
Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate Certificates
Purpose of Ballot: Section 7.1.4.3 of the BRs, which deals with Subject
Information for Subordinate CA Certificates, currently requires only that all
information in a Subordinate CA Certificate is accurate; it does not say what
information is required. Some of the necessary information is required
elsewhere in the BRs, but it is not complete - commonName is missing. If
commonName is omitted, DN clashes can more easily occur. So this motion
centralises that information in the obvious place, and adds a commonName
requirement.
The following motion has been proposed by Gervase Markham of Mozilla and
endorsed by Patrick Tronnier of OATI and Ryan Sleevi of Google:
-- MOTION BEGINS --
Make the following changes to the Baseline Requirements:
* Delete 7.1.2.1 (e), which currently defines the Subject Information required
in a Root CA Certificate.
* Delete 7.1.2.2 (h), which currently defines the Subject Information required
in a Subordinate CA Certificate.
* Rename section 7.1.4.2, currently titled "Subject Information", to "Subject
Information - Subscriber Certificates".
* Rename section 7.1.4.3, currently titled "Subject Information - Subordinate
CA Certificates" to "Subject Information - Root Certificates and Subordinate CA
Certificates".
* Based on the style used in 7.1.4.2.2 and the content from the now-deleted
7.1.2.1 (e) and 7.1.2.2 (h), add the following section 7.1.4.3.1:
7.1.4.3.1 Subject Distinguished Name Fields
Certificate Field: subject:commonName (OID 2.5.4.3)
Required/Optional: Required
Contents: This field MUST be present and the contents SHOULD be an identifier
for the certificate such that the certificate's Name is unique across all
certificates issued by the issuing certificate.
b. Certificate Field: subject:organizationName (OID 2.5.4.10)
Required/Optional: Required
Contents: This field MUST be present and the contents MUST contain
either the Subject CA’s name or DBA as verified under Section 3.2.2.2.
The CA may include information in this field that differs slightly from
the verified name, such as common variations or abbreviations, provided
that the CA documents the difference and any abbreviations used are
locally accepted abbreviations; e.g., if the official record shows
“Company Name Incorporated”, the CA MAY use “Company Name Inc.” or
“Company Name”.
c. Certificate Field: subject:countryName (OID: 2.5.4.6)
Required/Optional: Required
Contents: This field MUST contain the two‐letter ISO 3166‐1 country code
for the country in which the CA’s place of business is located.
-- MOTION ENDS --
The procedure for approval of this Final Maintenance Guideline ballot is as
follows (exact start and end times may be adjusted to comply with applicable
Bylaws and IPR Agreement):
BALLOT 199
Status: Final Maintenance Guideline
Start time (23:00 UTC)
End time (23:00 UTC)
Discussion (7 to 14 days)
25 Apr
2 May
Vote for approval (7 days)
2 May
9 May
If vote approves ballot: Review Period (Chair to send Review Notice) (30 days).
If Exclusion Notice(s) filed, ballot approval is rescinded and PAG to be
created.
If no Exclusion Notices filed, ballot becomes effective at end of Review Period.
Upon filing of Review Notice by Chair
30 days after filing of Review Notice by Chair
From Bylaw 2.3: If the Draft Guideline Ballot is proposing a Final Maintenance
Guideline, such ballot will include a redline or comparison showing the set of
changes from the Final Guideline section(s) intended to become a Final
Maintenance Guideline, and need not include a copy of the full set of
guidelines. Such redline or comparison shall be made against the Final
Guideline section(s) as they exist at the time a ballot is proposed, and need
not take into consideration other ballots that may be proposed subsequently,
except as provided in Bylaw Section 2.3(j).
Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread on the Public
list. 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/
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 shown on CA/Browser Forum
wiki. Under Bylaw 2.2(g), at least the required quorum number must participate
in the ballot for the ballot to be valid, either by voting in favor, voting
against, or abstaining.
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
