Because Adam can’t post his responses to the Public@ list, I’m doing it for him 
at his request.

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:46 PM
To: Kirk Hall <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: [EXTERNAL]RE: Membership Application of Sony

All:

First, a bit of background.  The ATSC 3.0 television broadcast standard (see 
www.atsc.org<http://www.atsc.org>, or search the web for “ATSC 3.0”), which is 
generally speaking a modification of the over-the-air digital broadcast system, 
which is based on a UDP multicast over-the-air (with an optional online aspect, 
for a hybrid system) – and an attempt to use internet/web/W3C tools when 
possible.

This includes a number of security features (and I chair the security group in 
ATSC).  Among those features are support for content protection mechanisms 
using EME and CENC … as well as cryptographic signing mechanisms.  Deployments 
plan to use public root(s) for code signing (and signaling signing, more detail 
below).

To answer the questions:

Ryan Sleevi:
It sounds like the question is "Can we join the Forum without joining a CWG" - 
but that may not be a correct understanding.

That’s not our ask.  I’m happy to participate in a (the) CWG, but see below.

               Kirk Hall:

(a) All Forum members must *** meet at least one of the following criteria: ***

(3) Certificate Consumer: The member organization produces a software product, 
such as a browser, intended for use by the general public for relying upon 
certificates and is a member of a CWG [Chartered Working Group, such as the new 
Server Certificate Working Group].

Today we only have one Chartered Working Group (CWG).  Its charter has the 
following additional requirement for participation as a browser (Certificate 
Consumer):

(3) A Certificate Consumer can participate in this Working Group if it produces 
a software product intended for use by the general public for browsing the Web 
securely.

So to participate in this CWG (the only one we have), Sony must “produce[] a 
software product intended for use by the general public for browsing the Web 
securely”.  Can you tell us if Sony meets that requirement?

An ATSC 3.0 TV is a dual-homed device with both a one-way over-the-air 
interface which receives UDP multicasts, and a traditional IP interface (802.3, 
802.11) for an internet connection.  This sort of TV includes a HTML5 browser, 
and our security requirements include mandatory use of DNSSEC and TLS 1.2, 1.3. 
 So, these devices are products with software intended for use by the general 
public for browsing the web securely … but “browsing the web” is a little bit 
more constrained than a PC with a browser, more like “browsing [some content 
on] the web”.

As a threshold matter, I think such a TV is hardware bundled with software 
which is capable of fetching content (including HTML and other content, like 
audio/video) from the internet and rendering it, which relies upon certificates 
for security (TLS, DNSSEC).

However, of significant interest is the use of cryptographic signing to yield a 
tamper-evident transmission mechanism for both executable code (like HTML5 
apps) and related information (signaling, which includes things like 
what-content-is-where, and electronic program guide data).  It’s our hope that 
we can participate in the processes for maintaining requirements for public 
roots for signing certificates.

We realize that this is perhaps slightly different from the traditional CA/B 
Forum area, but at the same time, all or nearly all of the requirements and 
details for the issuance and management of code signing certificates (and where 
the CA Security Council refers to the Baseline Requirements, etc.) are directly 
usable and useful for the embedded systems that are TVs (& related broadcast 
systems).

Hopefully the above is clear, but I’d be happy to elaborate/explain more if 
that’d be helpful.

Regards,

Adam Goldberg
Director, Technical Standards
Technology Standards Office
Sony Electronics, Inc.
202-601-4130 (tel)
571-363-9778 (mobile)

From: Kirk Hall [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 3:36 PM
To: Goldberg, Adam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: Membership Application of Sony

Adam – I just realized that there is a double test for anyone new applying to 
be a Forum member – one requirement to be a Forum Member, and a second 
requirement to be a member of a CWG.

In the browser (Certificate Consumer) category, the Forum membership 
requirement is as follows:

(a) All Forum members must *** meet at least one of the following criteria: ***

(3) Certificate Consumer: The member organization produces a software product, 
such as a browser, intended for use by the general public for relying upon 
certificates and is a member of a CWG [Chartered Working Group, such as the new 
Server Certificate Working Group].

Today we only have one Chartered Working Group (CWG).  Its charter has the 
following additional requirement for participation as a browser (Certificate 
Consumer):

(3) A Certificate Consumer can participate in this Working Group if it produces 
a software product intended for use by the general public for browsing the Web 
securely.

So to participate in this CWG (the only one we have), Sony must “produce[] a 
software product intended for use by the general public for browsing the Web 
securely”.  Can you tell us if Sony meets that requirement?

Sorry for any confusion – we are just rolling out this new governance structure 
now.

Kirk

From: Public [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kirk Hall via 
Public
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 12:15 PM
To: CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: Membership Application of Sony

Good question.  The SCWG Charter is shown below.  Ben and I are the initial 
SCWG Chair and Vice Chair until the SCWG elects its own officers.  The SCWG was 
approved in Ballot 206 and already exists, but the changes to the Bylaws don’t 
become effective until July 3.

After that date, I plan to issue an invitation to CABF Members and Associate 
Members to participate in the SCWG, and ask them to indicate their interest by 
“registering” on a page on the wiki.  Interested Parties can also indicate 
their interest in the WG, probably by email.

We should probably amend Bylaw 5.3.1 - Formation of Chartered Working Groups to 
include specific procedures for how Forum Members, etc. join new WGs once they 
are established.


Server Certificate Working Group Charter
Upon approval of the CAB Forum by ballot, the Server Certificate Working Group 
(“Working Group”) is created
to perform the activities as specified in this Charter, subject to the terms 
and conditions of the CA/Browser
Forum Bylaws and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy, as such documents 
may change from time to
time. The definitions found in the Forum’s Bylaws shall apply to capitalized 
terms in this Charter.
SCOPE: The authorized scope of the Server Certificate Working Group shall be as 
follows:
1. To specify Baseline Requirements, Extended Validation Guidelines, Network 
and Certificate System
Security Requirements, and other acceptable practices for the issuance and 
management of SSL/TLS
server certificates used for authenticating servers accessible through the 
Internet.
2. To update such requirements and guidelines from time to time, in order to 
address both existing and
emerging threats to online security, including responsibility for the 
maintenance of and future
amendments to the current CA/Browser Forum Baseline Requirements, Extended 
Validation
Requirements, and Network and Certificate System Security Requirements.
3. To perform such other activities that are ancillary to the primary 
activities listed above.
OUT OF SCOPE: The Server Certificate Working Group will not address 
certificates intended to be used primarily
for code signing, S/MIME, time-stamping, VoIP, IM, or Web services. The Server 
Certificate Working Group will
not address the issuance, or management of certificates by enterprises that 
operate their own Public Key
Infrastructure for internal purposes only, and for which the Root Certificate 
is not distributed by any Application
Software Supplier.
Anticipated End Date: None.
Initial chairs and contacts: Chair, Kirk Hall, 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Vice 
Chair, Ben Wilson,
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; terms to run 
concurrently with their terms as Chair and Vice Chair of the Forum,
respectively, unless otherwise voted upon by the Working Group.
Members eligible to participate: The Working Group shall consist of two classes 
of voting members, the
Certificate Issuers and the Certificate Consumers. The CA Class shall consist 
of eligible Certificate Issuers and
Root Certificate Issuers meeting the following criteria:
(1) Certificate Issuer: The member organization operates a certification 
authority that has a current and
successful WebTrust for CAs audit, or ETSI TS 102042, ETSI 101456, or ETSI EN 
319 411-1 audit report prepared
by a properly-qualified auditor, and that actively issues certificates to Web 
servers that are openly accessible
from the Internet, such certificates being treated as valid when using a 
browser created by a Certificate
Consumer Member. Applicants that are not actively issuing certificates but 
otherwise meet membership criteria
may be granted Associate Member status under Bylaw Sec. 3.1 for a period of 
time to be designated by the
Forum.
(2) Root Certificate Issuer: The member organization operates a certification 
authority that has a current
and successful WebTrust for CAs, or ETSI TS 102042, ETSI TS 101456, ETSI EN 319 
411-1 audit report prepared by
a properly-qualified auditor, and that actively issues certificates to 
subordinate CAs that, in turn, actively issue
certificates to Web servers that are openly accessible from the Internet, such 
certificates being treated as valid
when using a browser created by a Certificate Consumer Member. Applicants that 
are not actively issuing
certificates but otherwise meet membership criteria may be granted Associate 
Member status under Bylaw Sec.
3.1 for a period of time to be designated by the Forum.
(3) A Certificate Consumer can participate in this Working Group if it produces 
a software product intended
for use by the general public for browsing the Web securely.
The Working Group shall include Interested Parties and Associate Members as 
defined in the Bylaws.
Voting structure: In order for a ballot to be adopted by the Working Group, 
two-thirds or more of the votes cast
by the Certificate Issuers must be in favor of the ballot and more than 50% of 
the votes cast by the Certificate
Consumers must be in favor of the ballot. At least one member of each class 
must vote in favor of a ballot for it
to be adopted. Quorum is the average number of Member organizations 
(cumulative, regardless of Class) that
have participated in the previous three Server Certificate Working Group 
Meetings or Teleconferences (not
counting subcommittee meetings thereof). For transition purposes, if three 
meetings have not yet occurred,
quorum is ten (10).
Summary of the work that the WG plans to accomplish: As specified in Scope 
section above.
Summary of major WG deliverables and guidelines: As specified in Scope section 
above.
Primary means of communication: listserv-based email, periodic calls, and 
face-to-face meetings.
IPR Policy: The CA/Browser Forum Intellectual Rights Policy, v. 1.3 or later, 
SHALL apply to all Working Group
activity.

From: Wayne Thayer [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 10:32 AM
To: Kirk Hall 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; 
CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [cabfpub] Membership Application of Sony

The part that I find unclear is how one becomes a member of the Server 
Certificate WG. The charter defines membership criteria but there doesn't 
appear to be a process for adding members at the WG level.

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 10:21 AM Kirk Hall via Public 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Summary based on quotes from my original email to the list:

Original Sony question: “Can you please describe the bylaw requirement of 
“produces a software product, such as a browser, intended for use by the 
general public for relying upon certificates and is a member of a CWG”?  If we 
produce a hardware product which includes software which relies upon (public 
root) certificates, does that meet the definition of “produces a software 
product”?”

Dean Coclin response: “Perhaps you can help clarify by stating whether or not 
Sony makes the underlying software that runs in the hardware device made by 
Sony?”

Sony response: “Limiting the discussion to televisions (the question at-hand), 
they’re based on Android TV then with Sony software on top.  So, “does Sony 
make the software” is yes and no.  But we *do* write the software that does the 
cryptographic signature validation.”


Bylaws provide as follows:

(a) All Forum members must *** meet at least one of the following criteria: ***

(3) Certificate Consumer: The member organization produces a software product, 
such as a browser, intended for use by the general public for relying upon 
certificates and is a member of a CWG [Chartered Working Group, such as the new 
Server Certificate Working Group].

From: Ryan Sleevi [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 10:13 AM
To: Kirk Hall 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; CABFPub 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [cabfpub] [EXTERNAL]Re: Membership Application of Sony

I'm having trouble finding a clear summary of the question from the message 
forwarded.

Could you helpfully re-state it?

It sounds like the question is "Can we join the Forum without joining a CWG" - 
but that may not be a correct understanding.
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public

Reply via email to