There have been several attempts relating to definitions of both 'misissue' and 'misuse'
Mozilla attempted to refine its definition in Mozilla Policy 2.4 after substantial discussion as https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.security.policy/UHRdmKNVAOg/Sqtj-YLdCAAJ Opera attempted a ballot to require CAs disclose when they perform incorrect issuance - https://cabforum.org/2016/02/12/ballot-161/ - which similarly touched on a substantial discussion of these two words. On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Rich Smith via Public <[email protected]> wrote: > The BRs use the term misuse/misused in multiple places in regards to reasons > for revocation, and Subscriber representations, but do not define the term. > > > > What constitutes misuse of a certificate? Phishing? Fraud? Or is it only > compromise of the private key or other action that results in someone who is > not authorized being allowed use of the certificate? Or is it something > else? > > > > Because it is undefined interpretations are all over the map. IMO the > definition needs to be pinned down and codified in the Definitions section > of the BRs. > > > > Regards, > > Rich Smith > > Senior Compliance Manager > > Comodo > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > [email protected] > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public > _______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
