Hearing no comments on this, we will proceed with this clarification.
Jos-can I ask you to please make this adjustment? Thanks, Dean From: Public <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dean Coclin via Public Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 2:25 PM To: CABforum1 <[email protected]> Subject: [cabfpub] Website revision regarding membership applications The information on our website for potential members could use some clarification (https://cabforum.org/information-for-potential-members/). I would like to propose a revision to item 9 on this list, as this is frequently an area of confusion: Here are the points you should address in your application: * (1) written confirmation that you are a qualifying Certificate Issuer or Root Certificate Issuer, as described above; * (2) organization name, as you wish it to appear on the Forum Web site and in official Forum documents; * (3) URL of your main Web site; * (4) Names and email addresses of employees who will participate in the Forum mail list (Full names and nicknames with surnames will be helpful in future communications); * (5) Emergency contact information for security issues related to certificate trust lists (Email addresses, at least one telephone number, and full names and nicknames with surnames will be helpful in future communications); * (6) the URL of your current qualifying performance audit report; * (7) the URL of at least one third party website that includes a certificate issued by the Applicant in the certificate chain; * (8) links or references to issued certificates that demonstrate compliance with all applicable certificate, CRL, and OCSP requirements; and * (9) a completed IPR Policy Agreement, found here - <https://cabforum.org/wp-content/uploads/CAB-Forum-Agreement-for-IPR-Policy_ 20FEB18.pdf> CAB Forum Agreement for IPR Policy v.1.3 - we will accept either a scanned/digitized signature or a digital signature. Our IPR Policy and the IPR Policy Agreement are also found here <https://cabforum.org/ipr-policy/> . We have had cases where we have received the IPR agreement signed by someone in the company who questionably is not authorized to bind the organization to such an agreement. I propose we modify #9 as follows: * (9) a completed IPR Policy Agreement, found here - <https://cabforum.org/wp-content/uploads/CAB-Forum-Agreement-for-IPR-Policy_ 20FEB18.pdf> CAB Forum Agreement for IPR Policy v.1.3 - signed by an officer or someone in the organization who is authorized to bind the company to the terms of the agreement. Normally this is someone from the legal department or a corporate officer (i.e. President, Vice President, etc.) If it is signed by someone who is not an officer, it must be accompanied by a letter signed by an officer stating that the signatory is authorized to bind the organization to the agreement. We will accept either a scanned/digitized signature or a digital signature. Our IPR Policy and the IPR Policy Agreement are also found here <https://cabforum.org/ipr-policy/> . I'm open to better wording. Thoughts? Any objections? Dean
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
