CA/Browser Forum
Home » All CA/Browser Forum Posts » Ballot 101 – EV 11.10.2 Accountants

Ballot 101 – EV 11.10.2 Accountants

Ballot 101 – Section 11.10.2 of EV Guidelines – Accountant Licensing (Passed)

Motion

Ryan Koski made the following motion, and Ben Wilson from DigiCert and Rich Smith from Comodo endorsed it:

Motion Begins

EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, in order to eliminate a conflict in the Extended Validation Guidelines between the definition of Accounting Practitioner in Section 4 (Definitions) mentioning “country” and the specific requirements for verifying the status of Accounting Practitioners in 11.10.2(1)(A) which does not, and to clarify the requirement, we propose amending section 11.10.2 as follows:

DELETE

(A) Status of Author: The CA MUST verify that the accountant letter is authored by an independent Accounting Practitioner retained by and representing the Applicant (or an in-house professional accountant employed by the Applicant) who is a certified public accountant, chartered accountant, or has an equivalent license within the Applicant’s Jurisdiction of Incorporation, Jurisdiction of Registration, or the jurisdiction where the Applicant maintains an office or physical facility. Verification of license MUST be through that jurisdiction’s member of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) or through the regulatory organization in that jurisdiction appropriate to contact when verifying an accountant’s license to practice in that jurisdiction.

and INSERT:

(A) Status of Author: The CA MUST verify that the accountant letter is authored by an Accounting Practitioner retained or employed by the Applicant and licensed within the country of the Applicant’s Jurisdiction of Incorporation, Jurisdiction of Registration, or country where the Applicant maintains an office or physical facility. Verification of license MUST be through the member organization or regulatory organization in the Accounting Practitioner’s country or jurisdiction that is appropriate to contact when verifying an accountant’s license to practice in that country or jurisdiction. Such country or jurisdiction must have an accounting standards body that maintains full membership status with the International Federation of Accountants.

=====Motion Ends=====

The review period for this ballot shall commence at 21:00 UTC on 24 May 2013 and will close at 21:00 UTC on 31 May 2013. Unless the motion is withdrawn during the review period, the voting period will start immediately thereafter and will close at 21:00 UTC on 7 June 2013. Votes must be cast by posting an on-list reply to this thread.

Motion Ends

A vote in favor of the motion must indicate a clear ‘yes’ in the response. A vote against must indicate a clear ‘no’ in the response. A vote to abstain must indicate a clear ‘abstain’ in the response. Unclear responses will not be counted. The latest vote received from any representative of a voting member before the close of the voting period will be counted.

Latest releases
Server Certificate Requirements
SC099: Improve Recording of Validation Methods - May 19, 2026

Code Signing Requirements
v3.8 - Aug 5, 2024

What’s Changed CSC-25: Import EV Guidelines to CS Baseline Requirements by @dzacharo in https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/pull/38 Full Changelog: https://github.com/cabforum/code-signing/compare/v3.7...v3.8

S/MIME Requirements
v1.0.14 - Ballot SMC016 - May 5, 2026

This ballot maintains consistency between the S/MIME Baseline Requirements and the TLS Baseline Requirements with changes introduced by Ballots SC096 and SC097. Specifically, this ballot: Creates a carve-out of the logging requirements for DNSSEC specifically, stating these are not in scope. For audit purposes, change management logging is able to confirm if the appropriate controls are in effect or not. Sunsets all remaining use of SHA-1 signatures in Certificates and CRLs. It is noted that most uses of SHA-1 signatures are already deprecated by SC097. With this ballot, all unexpired Subordinate CA Certificates issuing S/MIME containing the SHA-1 signature algorithm must be revoked. This proposal does not prohibit the use of SHA-1 to generate issuerKeyHash or issuerNameHash values as currently required by RFC 5019. Includes minor formatting corrections.

Unable to retrieve latest release information from the netsec repository.
Edit this page
The Certification Authority Browser Forum (CA/Browser Forum) is a voluntary gathering of Certificate Issuers and suppliers of Internet browser software and other applications that use certificates (Certificate Consumers).