Announcement: Chrome requiring Certificate Transparency in 2017

2016-10-24 Thread Ryan Sleevi
[Note: This is cross-posted. The best venue for follow-up questions is the public mailing list at ct-pol...@chromium.org or the post at https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/msg/ct-policy/78N3SMcqUGw/ykIwHXuqAQAJ ] [Note: Posting wearing my Chrome hat. None of this reflects Mozilla policy,

Re: Please avoid S/MIME signatures when posting to this group

2016-10-24 Thread Gervase Markham
On 24/10/16 09:33, Mathias Tausig wrote: > Really only S/MIME signaures, or should PGP signatures be avoided, too? I'm not aware of the problem occurring with PGP signatures, but feel free to test in mozilla.test. Gerv ___ dev-security-policy mailing

Re: Guang Dong Certificate Authority (GDCA) root inclusion request

2016-10-24 Thread wangsn1206
We have already implemented version control on Chinese version CP/CPS, which include version number (e.g. V4.3) and effective date (e.g. 2016-08-01). The revision and release of CP/CPS are reviewed and approved by the security policy committee (see section 1.5 in CP/CPS). Meanwhile, we are a

Re: Please avoid S/MIME signatures when posting to this group

2016-10-24 Thread Mathias Tausig
Really only S/MIME signaures, or should PGP signatures be avoided, too? cheers Mathias On Fre, 2016-10-21 at 13:26 -0700, Gervase Markham wrote: > In a development which proves that irony is not dead, I need to request > participants in this forum to avoid S/MIME-signing their messages here >

Re: Remediation Plan for WoSign and StartCom

2016-10-24 Thread Gervase Markham
On 24/10/16 06:55, Samuel Pinder wrote: > There's some good questions there, actually. OEM SSL, does that mean > another CA would be doing the validation and issuing using their own > infrastructure and team, which you would be reselling via a > constrained intermediate? I suspect he means