Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes

Forum Public Discussion List <public@cabforum.org>; Kirk > Hall <kirk.h...@entrustdatacard.com> > *Subject:* Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject > Attributes > > > > 2) The list of meta data characters is not spelled out clearly. We say > pare

Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:25 AM, Doug Beattie wrote: > Hi Kirk and Ryan, > > > > I think this points out a couple of important changes we should make to > the BRs: > > > > 1) We should clarify which fields can’t have just meta data characters. > The statement is

Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes

Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes Hi Kirk, Your email may be confusing somethings. This is related to Entrust's issuance of non-BR compliant certificates, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1390996 , correct? Hopefully you'll have a chance to reply

Re: [cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes

Hi Kirk, Your email may be confusing somethings. This is related to Entrust's issuance of non-BR compliant certificates, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1390996 , correct? Hopefully you'll have a chance to reply there, even if to only acknowledge receipt and that Entrust is

[cabfpub] Question on BR BR 7.1.4.2.2(j) - Other Subject Attributes

There has been a discussion on a Mozilla list Certificates with Metadata-Only Subject Fields, https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.security.policy/Sae5lpT02Ng, that concerns BR 7.1.4.2.2. Subject Distinguished Name Fields: j. Other Subject Attributes All other optional