On 16/5/2024 3:17 μ.μ., Arno Fiedler wrote:
Hello Dimitris,
the GLEIF has developed the concept of a “Verifiable Legal
Identifier”, the qvLEI are issued by a trusted network of “qualified”
vLEI Issuers.
That seems to be an interesting and important new topic in the field
of organizational identities/OV based on LEI
We can ask the GLEIF CEO Stepan Worl for a lecture, let me know if I
should ask him (like in 2017)
There is a new CEO taking over June 26, 2024. For me this sounds very
interesting and I've been following this work for a while. I assume you
are suggesting that we have a guest speaker on this topic in a future
F2F meeting, not the one in Bergamo which is just around the corner.
Thanks,
Dimitris.
Best regards
Arno
*Von:*Public <[email protected]> *Im Auftrag von *Dimitris
Zacharopoulos (HARICA) via Public
*Gesendet:* Dienstag, 14. Mai 2024 17:28
*An:* Ben Wilson <[email protected]>
*Cc:* CA/Browser Forum Public Discussion List <[email protected]>
*Betreff:* Re: [cabfpub] Bergamo F2F Agenda Item
On 14/5/2024 6:08 μ.μ., Ben Wilson wrote:
Hi Dimitris,
There appears to be an open slot on the F2F agenda - Wed. May 29th
at 9:05 a.m. I was thinking we could use that time to discuss
revocation timelines and balancing the security provided by
revocation with the security/stability needed to support critical
infrastructure. In other words, we could discuss BR section 4.9.1
and concerns about disruption of global/national operations in
banking/finance, transportation, government, telecommunications,
healthcare, and other key areas where certificate revocation might
cause key systems to fail.
Should I put this topic in that open slot on the wiki?
Thanks,
Ben
Hi Ben,
I think that would be great. I assume you will be leading this session.
I think it's a great opportunity for CAs with past experience on
delayed revocations to share some insight about specific challenges in
the sectors you listed, and possibly add some that are missing.
FYI, public evidence for delayed revocation incidents (open and
closed, based on specific tags) is available in this link
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?f1=OP&f4=CP&v2=ca-compliance&f2=status_whiteboard&o2=allwordssubstr&component=CA%20Certificate%20Compliance&query_format=advanced&list_id=17029100&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&v3=delayed-revocation%20leaf-revocation-delay&resolution=---&resolution=FIXED&resolution=INVALID&resolution=WONTFIX&resolution=DUPLICATE&resolution=WORKSFORME&o3=anywordssubstr&f3=status_whiteboard>.
Although you mentioned that this affects the BR section 4.9.1, this
topic affects all Working Groups because all the WG BRs have a section
4.9.1 that is pretty much similar with the TLS BRs. With that said, I
would like to ask if Members have any objections for discussing this
topic as part of the Forum plenary.
Thank you,
Dimitris
CA/B Forum Chair
_______________________________________________
Public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
