-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 134
Draft Ballot SC-XX: Improve Certificate Problem Reports and Clarify the Meaning of Revocation #622
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
XolphinMartijn
wants to merge
45
commits into
cabforum:main
Choose a base branch
from
XolphinMartijn:CPR_Revamp
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from 26 commits
Commits
Show all changes
45 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
270572f
Clarify the meaning of revocation
ChristopherRC a37126e
fix typo
ChristopherRC c704cd0
improve the usefulness of CPRs
ChristopherRC 4a6b8ce
fix smart quote and bump BR version number references
ChristopherRC bd57535
Merge branch 'cabforum:main' into improveCPRs-2
ChristopherRC ab72e67
Nit - fix bullet points
ChristopherRC 7612e9d
Merge pull request #1 from ChristopherRC/improveCPRs-2
XolphinMartijn 5c81321
Update effective dates and add more permissive language
XolphinMartijn df07211
fix: Utilize "MUST evaluate"
XolphinMartijn 31a6479
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn be40b46
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn 342ff48
use "applicable Subscriber"
XolphinMartijn 65085bd
Linebreak
XolphinMartijn 4bb06c1
Linebreak
XolphinMartijn 594427d
Character replacement
XolphinMartijn 91f8e5e
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn 4e43a30
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn cf05e90
Use Key Compromise term
XolphinMartijn 332ac9e
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn a2a51e2
fix: Revert language based on feedback, removing "Subordinate"
XolphinMartijn b4bb5c5
Utilize Issuing CAs
XolphinMartijn 9093e46
Move 4.4.4 into 4.9.3
XolphinMartijn 9642e7b
"Revoked" defined term
XolphinMartijn 0b97d0d
Move Key Compromise language to 4.9.12
XolphinMartijn 0f2553b
Don't call out attachments specifically
XolphinMartijn c32f356
Remove "revocation requests or"
XolphinMartijn ef4e201
Simplify the Revoked language
XolphinMartijn f0b7e46
Simplify the Revoked language
XolphinMartijn 2ad1582
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn f010ab1
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn fb938d0
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn 572ee86
Apply suggestions from code review
XolphinMartijn 9db978c
Add contact-details carve-out
XolphinMartijn 8193abc
Use SHA256 fingerprint
XolphinMartijn 53df8aa
Use "information"
XolphinMartijn 339b88d
Add Subscriber revocation requests authentication language
XolphinMartijn 90856b8
Merge branch 'main' into CPR_Revamp
XolphinMartijn 2840471
Update "Revoked" definition
XolphinMartijn d25aa9b
"and" no longer required
XolphinMartijn d7c86f8
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn 267cdf4
Update effective date
XolphinMartijn 9112942
Update Baseline Requirements version in BR.md
XolphinMartijn 6cf96bd
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn d4df4e7
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn 4751419
Update docs/BR.md
XolphinMartijn File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -502,6 +502,10 @@ The script outputs: | |
|
|
||
| [https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml) | ||
|
|
||
| **Revoked**: Effective 2026-05-15, a certificate is considered revoked if: | ||
| - if the certificate contains a CRL Distribution Point URI, a CRL containing the certificate serial number is available for consumption by Relying Parties at that URI; and | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
| - if the certificate contains an Authority Information Access OCSP URI, an OCSP request to that URI for the certificate serial number results in a response with a `certStatus` value of `revoked`. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| **Root CA**: The top level Certification Authority whose Root Certificate is distributed by Application Software Suppliers and that issues Subordinate CA Certificates. | ||
|
|
||
| **Root Certificate**: The self-signed Certificate issued by the Root CA to identify itself and to facilitate verification of Certificates issued to its Subordinate CAs. | ||
|
|
@@ -1532,18 +1536,48 @@ The Subscriber, RA, or Issuing CA can initiate revocation. Additionally, Subscri | |
|
|
||
| ### 4.9.3 Procedure for revocation request | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
|
|
||
| The CA SHALL provide a process for Subscribers to request revocation of their own Certificates. The process MUST be described in the CA's Certificate Policy or Certification Practice Statement. The CA SHALL maintain a continuous 24x7 ability to accept and respond to revocation requests and Certificate Problem Reports. | ||
| Prior to 2026-05-15, for Section 4.9.3 of these Requirements, the CA SHALL adhere to these Requirements or Version 2.1.7 of the Baseline Requirements for TLS Server Certificates. Effective 2026-05-15, the CA SHALL adhere to these Requirements. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| The CA's Certificate Policy or Certification Practice Statement MUST describe a process for Subscribers to request revocation of their own Certificates. | ||
|
|
||
| The CA SHALL maintain a continuous 24x7 ability to accept and respond to revocation requests. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| The CA SHALL provide Subscribers, Relying Parties, Application Software Suppliers, and other third parties with clear instructions for reporting suspected Private Key Compromise, Certificate misuse, or other types of fraud, compromise, misuse, inappropriate conduct, or any other matter related to Certificates. The CA SHALL publicly disclose the instructions in Section 1.5.2 of their CPS and SHOULD additionally disclose the instructions through readily accessible online means (e.g. a KB article, dedicated webpage, FAQ). | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| Within twenty four (24) hours after receiving a Certificate Problem Report, the CA SHALL investigate the facts and circumstances related to the report and determine if it's "actionable." | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| A Certificate Problem Report is considered actionable if it includes: | ||
| 1. at least one serial number or hash of a time-valid and unrevoked Certificate issued by the CA; and | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
| 2. a description of either: | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
| - how the Certificate(s) in question violates these Requirements or a CA's own policies; or | ||
| - a reason for Certificate revocation (e.g., a demonstration of Key Compromise, or a Subscriber request aligned with [Section 4.9.1](#491-circumstances-for-revocation)). | ||
|
|
||
| A CA MAY take measures to prevent submission of non-actionable Certificate Problem Reports (e.g., input control validation on a form used to collect Certificate Problem Reports), but MUST be able to receive actionable Certificate Problem Reports. | ||
|
|
||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| Within twenty four (24) hours after determining a Certificate Problem Report is actionable: | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
| 1. The CA SHALL provide a report on its findings to the entity who filed the Certificate Problem Report, if contact details have been provided. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
| 2. The CA SHOULD provide a report on its findings to applicable Subscriber(s). | ||
| 3. If the CA determines the Certificate Problem Report requires an action of revocation for the Certificate(s) specified within, the CA SHOULD work with the applicable Subscriber to determine the date and time which the CA will revoke the Certificate. The period from the time the Certificate Problem Report was determined actionable to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in [Section 4.9.1.1](#4911-reasons-for-revoking-a-subscriber-certificate). | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Based on my comments above, I would rephrase this, "The period from the time an actionable Certificate Problem Report was received to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in Section 4.9.1.1." |
||
|
|
||
| The CA SHALL provide Subscribers, Relying Parties, Application Software Suppliers, and other third parties with clear instructions for reporting suspected Private Key Compromise, Certificate misuse, or other types of fraud, compromise, misuse, inappropriate conduct, or any other matter related to Certificates. The CA SHALL publicly disclose the instructions through a readily accessible online means and in Section 1.5.2 of their CPS. | ||
| Within one hundred and twenty (120) hours after determining a Certificate Problem Report is actionable, the CA MUST evaluate all time-valid and unrevoked Certificates issued by the CA to detect additional instances of the non-compliance described in the report. The period from the time the additional affected Certificates were first identified to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in [Section 4.9.1.1](#4911-reasons-for-revoking-a-subscriber-certificate). | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| Within twenty four (24) hours after determining a Certificate Problem Report is not actionable, the CA MUST provide a report on its findings to the entity who filed the Certificate Problem Report and request the information necessary to satisfy the above requirements of an actionable Certificate Problem Report. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| **Note**: If a non-actionable Certificate Problem Report is later amended by the reporter to satisfy the requirements of an actionable report described above, the time of receipt of the requested missing information is the basis for subsequent revocation timelines, if determined necessary. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
|
|
||
| ### 4.9.4 Revocation request grace period | ||
|
|
||
| No stipulation. | ||
|
|
||
| ### 4.9.5 Time within which CA must process the revocation request | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
|
|
||
| Within 24 hours after receiving a Certificate Problem Report, the CA SHALL investigate the facts and circumstances related to a Certificate Problem Report and provide a preliminary report on its findings to both the Subscriber and the entity who filed the Certificate Problem Report. | ||
| After reviewing the facts and circumstances, the CA SHALL work with the Subscriber and any entity reporting the Certificate Problem Report or other revocation-related notice to establish whether or not the certificate will be revoked, and if so, a date which the CA will revoke the certificate. The period from receipt of the Certificate Problem Report or revocation-related notice to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in [Section 4.9.1.1](#4911-reasons-for-revoking-a-subscriber-certificate). The date selected by the CA SHOULD consider the following criteria: | ||
| Prior to 2026-05-15, for Section 4.9.5 of these Requirements, the CA SHALL adhere to these Requirements or Version 2.1.7 of the Baseline Requirements for TLS Server Certificates. Effective 2026-05-15, the CA SHALL adhere to these Requirements. | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| The period from the time from receipt of a revocation request by the Subscriber to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in [Section 4.9.1.1](#4911-reasons-for-revoking-a-subscriber-certificate). | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| The period from the time from determining a Certificate Problem Report is actionable to published revocation MUST NOT exceed the time frame set forth in [Section 4.9.1.1](#4911-reasons-for-revoking-a-subscriber-certificate). | ||
|
XolphinMartijn marked this conversation as resolved.
Outdated
|
||
|
|
||
| The date selected by the CA SHOULD consider the following criteria: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. The nature of the alleged problem (scope, context, severity, magnitude, risk of harm); | ||
| 2. The consequences of revocation (direct and collateral impacts to Subscribers and Relying Parties); | ||
|
|
@@ -1575,10 +1609,9 @@ CAs issuing CA Certificates: | |
| 1. MUST update and publish a new CRL at least every twelve (12) months; | ||
| 2. MUST update and publish a new CRL within twenty-four (24) hours after recording a Certificate as revoked. | ||
|
|
||
| CAs MUST continue issuing CRLs until one of the following is true: | ||
| - all Subordinate CA Certificates containing the same Subject Public Key are expired or revoked; OR | ||
| - the corresponding Subordinate CA Private Key is destroyed. | ||
|
|
||
| Issuing CAs MUST continue issuing CRLs until one of the following is true: | ||
| - all CA Certificates containing the same Subject Public Key are expired or revoked; OR | ||
| - the Private Key for the Issuing CA has been destroyed. | ||
|
|
||
| ### 4.9.8 Maximum latency for CRLs (if applicable) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -1630,6 +1663,8 @@ No Stipulation. | |
|
|
||
| See [Section 4.9.1](#491-circumstances-for-revocation). | ||
|
|
||
| Effective 2026-05-15, the CA's Certificate Policy or Certification Practice Statement MUST describe the circumstances that necessitate the CA to (1) reject subsequent certificate requests containing the same public key and (2) perform a cascading revocation of all time-valid certificates containing the same public key when the revocation reason of a revocation is "Key Compromise", | ||
|
|
||
| ### 4.9.13 Circumstances for suspension | ||
|
|
||
| The Repository MUST NOT include entries that indicate that a Certificate is suspended. | ||
|
|
||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.