CA/Browser Forum
Home » Posts » 2015-02-19 Minutes

2015-02-19 Minutes

Attendees: Dean Coclin (Symantec), Doug Beattie (GlobalSign), Kirk Hall (Trend Micro), Bruce Morton (Entrust), Rick Andrews (Symantec), Ben Wilson (DigiCert), Eddy Nigg (Startcom), Volkan Nergiz (TurkTrust), Robin Alden (Comodo), Mads Henriksveen (BuyPass), Tim Shirley (Trustwave), Wayne Thayer (GoDaddy), Cornelia Enke (SwissSign), Atilla Biler (TurkTrust), Gerv Markham (Mozilla), Jeremy Rowley (DigiCert), Atsushi Inaba (GlobalSign), Sissel Hoel (BuyPass), Kubra Zeray (TurkTrust), Davut Tokgöz (E-Tugra), Cecilia Kam (Symantec).

  1. Antitrust Statement was read.
  2. Minutes of Feb 5th meeting were approved. Ben to post to website
  3. Ballot Status: Ballots 143 and 144 were approved. Ben will update the website to reflect the new working group name. Ballot 144 requires changes to the EV Guidelines which Jeremy will amend and update. There were a large number of abstentions on ballot 144. Jeremy said that many people may have used that to help the ballot meet quorum and that they didn’t have a strong interest in the ballot.
  4. IPv6: Ryan put out a draft ballot on this topic. Dean sent out the results of a survey of CASC members on this topic which Gerv said was very useful. Gerv said it would be good for the Internet for the Forum to support IPv6 and that the ballot provides a generous amount of time to do this. Jeremy said some CAs use a CDN and that may not support IPv6. Wayne updated the group stating that GoDaddy can now support it. Rick stated that for the sake of a complete argument, why not let market forces control this? Let people choose a CA that supports it if they want. Gerv said that doesn’t work because a user or third party doesn’t have that choice. Rick said most browsers don’t fail on OCSP failure so it’s not blocking anything.
  5. Membership Application of TrustCor Systems: The Forum received an application for membership from this entity. They have a WebTrust report from Princeton Audit Group which stated they are not actively issuing certificates yet. Dean sent the applicant a note asking for a site that uses one of their certs. He also sent a note to Don Sheehy about the auditor qualifications. Kirk asked if they have a BR audit which Dean will ask the applicant. Kirk suggested that if they don’t fully qualify, they could be granted observer status. Wayne asked if we should update the membership rules to require a BR audit. Jeremy agreed that this should be updated and that when we do a bylaw update, this should be undertaken. Wayne also said that everyone on the Management list is also on the Questions list.
  6. New Ballots: Operational Existence (145) and pre-ballot Domain Validation (146). Cecilia and Kirk said that the EV Working group proposed ballot 145 for Government entity purposes. Discussion period for 145 starts today. Ballot 146 is a proposal to eliminate the “any other method (7)” for domain validation. Jeremy said they are soliciting comments and should have a proposal ready by the face to face meeting. Kirk encouraged others to bring forward any other verification methods for domain validation. Jeremy said there is another ballot coming forward on using attorney opinion letters for legal existence. This should be out before the face to face meeting.
  7. Working group publicity: To date, the working group mailing lists have not been public. The bylaws state (in one place) that minutes and agendas of working groups should be made public and (in another place) that the lists should be managed in the same fashion as the public list. Gerv said that some working groups weren’t public because they were in existence before the bylaws. But we should make the archives publicly accessible. Wayne said we can publish the URL to subscribe to the list. Gerv said that when groups are re-chartered, we should create a new list to not violate anyone’s expectation of privacy from the old list. Regarding the new Validation Working Group, Gerv suggested we re-subscribe all the old members to the new list and state that it would be made public. It has to be clear that active participation is limited to those that have signed the IPR.
  8. EV WG update: Per #6 above.
  9. Code Signing update: Public draft of BR issued. Some comments received which the working group will address before the face to face meeting.
  10. Policy Review WG: A ballot will be proposed for the reconfiguration of the BRs to RFC 3647 format.
  11. Info Sharing WG: Hasn’t met in a while but needs to get back together soon. Members have had conflicts during the meeting time.
  12. Any other business: Kirk said we have 32 members coming to the F2F meeting. Send agenda items to Dean.
  13. Next meeting will be March 5th.

Dean Coclin CA/B Forum Chair

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).