SSC votes: "Yes".
Thanks,
M.D.
On 4/25/2017 6:03 PM, Gervase Markham via Public wrote:
*Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate Certificates
*
*Purpose of Ballot: *Section 7.1.4.3 of the BRs, which deals with
Subject Information for Subordinate CA Certificates, currently
SwissSign votes Yes on ballo 199
Von: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] Im Auftrag von Gervase Markham
via Public
Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. April 2017 17:03
An: CABFPub
Cc: Gervase Markham
Betreff: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
Ballot
Apple votes YES.
Curt
> On May 5, 2017, at 6:22 AM, Gervase Markham via Public
> wrote:
>
>
> This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is currently
> in the voting period (voting ends on 9th May).
>
> Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Gervase Markham via Public <
public@cabforum.org> wrote:
> *Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate Certificates*
>
Google votes YES
___
Public mailing list
Public@cabforum.org
On 08/05/17 15:30, Mads Egil Henriksveen wrote:
> I am aware of this change, but it is still required that we should do this.
>From RFC 2119:
3. SHOULD This word, or the adjective "RECOMMENDED", mean that there
may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a
particular
- Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
On 08/05/17 10:37, Mads Egil Henriksveen wrote:
> I support that CN is required in all certificates, but I don’t support
> that we should require a unique CN across all CA certificates issued
> by the issuing CA.
We don't.
Trustwave votes YES on ballot 199.
From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
via Public
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2017 8:23 AM
To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org>
Cc: Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org>
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require common
On 08/05/17 10:37, Mads Egil Henriksveen wrote:
> I support that CN is required in all certificates, but I don’t support
> that we should require a unique CN across all CA certificates issued by
> the issuing CA.
We don't. That MUST was changed to a SHOULD.
> As long as we issue a new
15:23
Para: CABFPub
CC: Gervase Markham
Asunto: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is currently
in the voting period (voting ends on 9th May).
Ballot 199 - Require commonName i
HARICA votes "yes" to ballot 199.
Dimitris.
On 5/5/2017 4:22 μμ, Gervase Markham via Public wrote:
///This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is
currently in the voting period (voting ends on 9th May)./
*Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org>
Cc: Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org>
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require
commonName in Root and Intermediate
;
Cc: Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org <mailto:g...@mozilla.org> >
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate
Certificates
This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is currently
in the voting period (voting ends on 9th Ma
GlobalSign votes Yes.
From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
via Public
Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 9:23 AM
To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org>
Cc: Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org>
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and
On 05/05/17 14:22, Gervase Markham via Public wrote:
> *Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate Certificates
> *
Mozilla votes YES.
Gerv
___
Public mailing list
Public@cabforum.org
https://cabforum.org/mailman/listinfo/public
///This is the corrected text (one word change) of ballot 199 which is
currently in the voting period (voting ends on 9th May)./
*Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and Intermediate Certificates
*
*Purpose of Ballot: *Section 7.1.4.3 of the BRs, which deals with
Subject Information for
On 04/05/17 16:20, Ben Wilson wrote:
> 1 - Does this ballot rule out “vanity CAs” – CAs with customer names in
> the subject field, even though the key is held by the root CA? (I can
> provide further clarification, and/or examples, if necessary.
I don't think so. It doesn't mandate the contents
,
Ben
From: Public [mailto:public-boun...@cabforum.org] On Behalf Of Gervase Markham
via Public
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 9:03 AM
To: CABFPub <public@cabforum.org>
Cc: Gervase Markham <g...@mozilla.org>
Subject: [cabfpub] Ballot 199 - Require commonName in Root and
Following discussion on the call today, there is a minor edit to this
ballot:
On 25/04/17 16:03, Gervase Markham wrote:
> 7.1.4.3.1 Subject Distinguished Name Fields
>
> Certificate Field: subject:commonName (OID 2.5.4.3)
> Required/Optional: Required
> Contents: This field MUST be present and
On 25/04/17 18:15, Peter Bowen wrote:
> What does "such that the certificate's Name is unique across all
> certificates issued by the issuing certificate” mean? How is this a
> requirement on commonName, if this means the full subject Name?
In the previous discussion, you wrote:
"What is the
19 matches
Mail list logo