How are the concerns that were raised by Microsoft (copied below for reference) addressed in this version? If the intent is for the language in section 2.g(iv) to only apply to periodic, policy-driven password changes and not to prevent event-driven changes, I think that should be clarified.
* How would auditors verify and prove that a CA did not change a password more frequently than two years? This is trying to prove a negative. * What about when a CA employee leaves who knows the password which requires it to be change in less than two years? * What about if the password is compromised and needs to be changed in less than two years? - Wayne On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:51 AM Tim Hollebeek via Public < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > Adding the public list as discussed on the call. > > > > -Tim > > > > *From:* Servercert-wg [mailto:servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org] *On > Behalf Of *Adriano Santoni via Servercert-wg > *Sent:* Thursday, July 12, 2018 1:53 AM > *To:* servercert...@cabforum.org > *Subject:* Re: [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC3: Improvements to Network > Security Guidelines > > > > Let's try again.... > > > > Il 11/07/2018 19:44, Dimitris Zacharopoulos ha scritto: > > Are all members who have declared participation to this WG, able to post > to this list without moderation? > > > Dimitris. > > On 10/7/2018 12:44 πμ, Tim Hollebeek wrote: > > TL;DR: Ballot SC3 is exactly the same as Ballot 221, the only changes are > to include a redline, and to make the requirements around password > lifetimes a bit easier to read. > > > > -Tim > > > > *From:* Servercert-wg [mailto:servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org > <servercert-wg-boun...@cabforum.org>] *On Behalf Of *Tim Hollebeek > *Sent:* Monday, July 9, 2018 5:05 PM > *To:* servercert...@cabforum.org > *Subject:* [Servercert-wg] Ballot SC3: Improvements to Network Security > Guidelines > > > > > > > https://github.com/cabforum/documents/compare/SC3-PasswordChangesDieDieDie?expand=1 > <https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/w3SNCD3ZPqiIHmG6GXQmMcpxJd39lEmhmg1-ClFjL38=?d=YMUymk5xzAqKOdMvON-ldFEp_7UP2sC4cYZ6TzrgYt2-zJB8Q5_-dpEOPYnkNKqBVZCSFImKELeg6ZNvZjVZEnv7Bv-jXiAr9Mc_qq-8qfUCGeSRZwUiBztoWKL-X1ugoJvDAxECNt2NNE1HHUN4XEv-AjToN12FYo8l-wX_TNR1paGyMJIzQ9ctVzhEFHi3BbgKwBH98BJUcFWWvyWgL2xNOmt9ZVLpYntV7KqP2EMR1ON0ZnyKlXBG0WRRJ6ain99Osz0P0qskfJ2zwV5Tw4DJKL1krtZ0gjn5akZ1SQkWkvgmB_T5y6E8FLek7hlDC3f_37bR1iHSumTcA8pJG_XLAo3GuAr-KjZkzU4N8GCXOrnCB_OatMTWP7EYeFik_uSnHzs0eyZ_G9yDxrEPonZjYhS2KgEL7HWdEDEzpJ_x2FOejuS6P9m0S_m54IWdGJVNzu0m&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcabforum%2Fdocuments%2Fcompare%2FSC3-PasswordChangesDieDieDie%3Fexpand%3D1> > > > > Ballot 221: Two-Factor Authentication and Password Improvements > > > > Purpose of Ballot: The Network Security Working Group met a number of > times to > > improve the Network Security Guidelines requirements around authentication, > > specifically by requiring two-factor authentication, and improving the > password > > requirements in line with more recent NIST guidelines. > > > > While CAs are encouraged to improve their password requirements as soon as > > possible, a two year grace period is being given to allow organizations to > > develop and implement policies to implement the improved requirements, > especially > > since some organizations may have to simultaneously comply with other > > compliance frameworks that have not been updated yet and are based on > older NIST > > guidance about passwords. > > > > The following motion has been proposed by Tim Hollebeek of DigiCert and > endorsed > > by Dimitris Zacharopoulos of Harica and Neil Dunbar of TrustCor. > > > > — MOTION BEGINS – > > > > This ballot modifies the “Network and Certificate System Security > Requirements” > > as follows, based upon Version 1.1: > > > > In the definitions, add a definition for Multi-Factor Authentication: > > > > "Multi-Factor Authentication: An authentication mechanism consisting of > two or > > more of the following independent categories of credentials (i.e. factors) > to > > verify the user’s identity for a login or other transaction: something you > know > > (knowledge factor), something you have (possession factor), and something > you > > are (inherence factor). Each factor must be independent. > Certificate-based > > authentication can be used as part of Multifactor Authentication only if > the > > private key is stored in a Secure Key Storage Device." > > > > Capitalize all instances of the defined term "Multi-Factor Authentication". > > > > Add a definition for Secure Key Storage Device: > > > > "Secure Key Storage Device: A device certified as meeting at least FIPS > 140-2 > > level 2 overall, level 3 physical, or Common Criteria (EAL 4+)." > > > > In section 1.j., capitalize Multi-Factor Authentication, and strike the > > parenthetical reference to subsection 2.n.(ii). > > > > In section 2.f., add "(for accountability purposes, group accounts or > shared > > role credentials SHALL NOT be used)" after "authenticate to Certificate > Systems". > > > > Change section 2.g. to read: > > > > "g. If an authentication control used by a Trusted Role is a username and > password, > > then, where technically feasible, implement the following controls: > > i. For accounts that are accessible only within Secure Zones > or High Security > > Zones, require that passwords have at least twelve (12) > characters; > > ii. For authentications which cross a zone boundary into a > Secure Zone or High > > Security Zone, require Multi-Factor Authentication. For > accounts accessible > > from outside a Secure Zone or High Security Zone require > passwords that have > > at least eight (8) characters and are not be one of the > user's previous > > four (4) passwords; and implement account lockout for > failed access attempts > > in accordance with subsection k; > > iii. When developing password policies, CAs SHOULD take into > account the password > > guidance in NIST 800-63B Appendix A. > > iv. Frequent password changes have been shown to cause users to > select less > > secure passwords. If passwords are required to be changed > periodically, > > that period SHOULD NOT be less than two years. Effective > April 1, 2020, > > if passwords are required to be changed periodically, that > period SHALL NOT > > be less than two years." > > > > In section 2.h., change "Require" to "Have a policy that requires" > > > > In section 2.i., change "Configure" to "Have a procedure to configure" > > > > Change section 2.k. to read: > > > > "k. Lockout account access to Certificate Systems after no more than five > (5) failed > > access attempts, provided that this security measure: > > i. is supported by the Certificate System, > > ii. Cannot be leveraged for a denial of service attack, and > > iii. does not weaken the security of this authentication control;" > > > > Change section 2.n. to read: > > > > "Enforce Multi-Factor Authentication for all Trusted Role accounts on > Certificate > > Systems (including those approving the issuance of a Certificate, which > equally > > applies to Delegated Third Parties) that are accessible from outside a > Secure Zone > > or High Security Zone; and" > > > > — MOTION ENDS – > > > > The procedure for approval of this ballot is as follows: > > > > Discussion (7+ days) > > > > Start Time: 2018-07-09 17:00:00 EST > > > > End Time: not before 2018-07-16 17:00:00 EST > > > > Vote for approval (7 days) > > > > Start Time: TBD > > > > End Time: TBD > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Servercert-wg mailing list > > servercert...@cabforum.org > > http://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg > <https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/1RT4B1QqRVgkzzWM-zScCni7ShyhhMyQe-xxaMmlzyQ=?d=YMUymk5xzAqKOdMvON-ldFEp_7UP2sC4cYZ6TzrgYt2-zJB8Q5_-dpEOPYnkNKqBVZCSFImKELeg6ZNvZjVZEnv7Bv-jXiAr9Mc_qq-8qfUCGeSRZwUiBztoWKL-X1ugoJvDAxECNt2NNE1HHUN4XEv-AjToN12FYo8l-wX_TNR1paGyMJIzQ9ctVzhEFHi3BbgKwBH98BJUcFWWvyWgL2xNOmt9ZVLpYntV7KqP2EMR1ON0ZnyKlXBG0WRRJ6ain99Osz0P0qskfJ2zwV5Tw4DJKL1krtZ0gjn5akZ1SQkWkvgmB_T5y6E8FLek7hlDC3f_37bR1iHSumTcA8pJG_XLAo3GuAr-KjZkzU4N8GCXOrnCB_OatMTWP7EYeFik_uSnHzs0eyZ_G9yDxrEPonZjYhS2KgEL7HWdEDEzpJ_x2FOejuS6P9m0S_m54IWdGJVNzu0m&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fservercert-wg> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Servercert-wg mailing list > > servercert...@cabforum.org > > http://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/servercert-wg > <https://clicktime.symantec.com/a/1/1RT4B1QqRVgkzzWM-zScCni7ShyhhMyQe-xxaMmlzyQ=?d=YMUymk5xzAqKOdMvON-ldFEp_7UP2sC4cYZ6TzrgYt2-zJB8Q5_-dpEOPYnkNKqBVZCSFImKELeg6ZNvZjVZEnv7Bv-jXiAr9Mc_qq-8qfUCGeSRZwUiBztoWKL-X1ugoJvDAxECNt2NNE1HHUN4XEv-AjToN12FYo8l-wX_TNR1paGyMJIzQ9ctVzhEFHi3BbgKwBH98BJUcFWWvyWgL2xNOmt9ZVLpYntV7KqP2EMR1ON0ZnyKlXBG0WRRJ6ain99Osz0P0qskfJ2zwV5Tw4DJKL1krtZ0gjn5akZ1SQkWkvgmB_T5y6E8FLek7hlDC3f_37bR1iHSumTcA8pJG_XLAo3GuAr-KjZkzU4N8GCXOrnCB_OatMTWP7EYeFik_uSnHzs0eyZ_G9yDxrEPonZjYhS2KgEL7HWdEDEzpJ_x2FOejuS6P9m0S_m54IWdGJVNzu0m&u=http%3A%2F%2Fcabforum.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fservercert-wg> > > > _______________________________________________ > Public mailing list > Public@cabforum.org > https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public >
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@cabforum.org https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public