> On Jan 22, 2018, at 13:05, Bruce Morton via Public <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Geoff,
>  
> We put together an example of using method 1. Please see attached.


Thanks for posting this. I was initially unclear on how 3.2.2.4.1 worked in 
practice, and this walkthrough made the pieces fit together for me.

Unfortunately, the implementation described does nothing to verify domain 
control, and so should obviously be removed from the BRs immediately. 
Additionally, given the level of weakness I think it would make a lot of sense 
to revalidate or revoke all certificates that are currently valid and have been 
issued using this method.

The phone number in a D&B record that matches the Registrant Organization and 
address from the WHOIS does not indicate domain control, all it indicates is 
that someone put a record into the D&B database. There are >25 results matching 
‘Apple’ with an address in California in the D&B database, so clearly they 
don’t do any duplicate prevention, which makes sense because business entity 
names are not unique. This means that anyone who can either a) create a new D&B 
entry that would match your search or b) edit an existing D&B entry matching 
your search has the ability to receive certificates using this method. 
Obviously neither a) or b) indicate domain control, so this method is 
completely inadequate.

Additionally, even without any changes to the D&B database, there is no link 
between the Applicant Authorization Contact and domain control. This means that 
anyone accessible via the phone number in D&B can authorize the issuance of a 
certificate. So if the phone number is a corporate switchboard, anyone in the 
phone directory, including janitorial staff, interns, and temporary contractors 
would be capable of authorizing certificate issuance if their name was 
specified as the Applicant Authorization Contact.

There are a bunch of other potential issues that come to mind, but this method 
is already so hopelessly broken that I don’t think it makes sense to continue.

Jonathan
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to