Confirmed users, Administrators
5,526
edits
CA/Subordinate CA Checklist: Difference between revisions
m
→Terminology
m (→Terminology) |
|||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
#* For this case, the standard [[CA:How_to_apply | root inclusion process]] applies, and it will be verified that the sub-CAs are sufficiently covered by the CP/CPS and audits. | #* For this case, the standard [[CA:How_to_apply | root inclusion process]] applies, and it will be verified that the sub-CAs are sufficiently covered by the CP/CPS and audits. | ||
# '''Third-party public subordinate CAs:''' In this case the root signs subordinate CAs for organizations who operate the sub-CA to sign certificates for other entities not affiliated with their organization. One example is a commercial CA which establishes one or more subordinate CAs to be operated by third-party organizations acting as Certificate Service Providers (CSP). Another example is a government-sponsored root CA where the organization running the root CA delegates to other organizations the task of issuing end entity certificates to the general public. For example, there might be a separate organization authorized to issue certificates for general business purposes, another organization issuing certificates specifically within a vertical industry sector like financial services, a third organization to issue certificates to individuals, and so on. | # '''Third-party public subordinate CAs:''' In this case the root signs subordinate CAs for organizations who operate the sub-CA to sign certificates for other entities not affiliated with their organization. One example is a commercial CA which establishes one or more subordinate CAs to be operated by third-party organizations acting as Certificate Service Providers (CSP). Another example is a government-sponsored root CA where the organization running the root CA delegates to other organizations the task of issuing end entity certificates to the general public. For example, there might be a separate organization authorized to issue certificates for general business purposes, another organization issuing certificates specifically within a vertical industry sector like financial services, a third organization to issue certificates to individuals, and so on. | ||
#* A typical Mozilla user is likely to encounter certificates issued by these third parties in the course of typical activities like web browsing. Hence we need assurances that | #* A typical Mozilla user is likely to encounter certificates issued by these third parties in the course of typical activities like web browsing. Hence we need assurances that these third parties are required to follow practices that satisfy the [http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/certs/policy/ Mozilla CA Certificate Policy,] and we need to ensure that these third parties are under an acceptable audit regime. | ||
#* There is also a strong case for requiring disclosure of the identity of these third parties, because they are essentially functioning as public CAs. | #* There is also a strong case for requiring disclosure of the identity of these third parties, because they are essentially functioning as public CAs. | ||
#* Please see the [[CA:SubordinateCA_checklist#Third-Party_Public_Subordinate_CAs|section below]] which outlines the additional information that must be provided for | #* Please see the [[CA:SubordinateCA_checklist#Third-Party_Public_Subordinate_CAs|section below]] which outlines the additional information that must be provided for third-party public subordinate CAs. | ||
# '''Third-party private (or enterprise) subordinate CAs:''' This is the case where a commercial CA has enterprise customers who want to operate their own CAs for internal purposes, e.g., to issue SSL server certificates to systems running intranet applications, to issue individual SSL client certificates for employees or contractors for use in authenticating to such applications, and so on. | # '''Third-party private (or enterprise) subordinate CAs:''' This is the case where a commercial CA has enterprise customers who want to operate their own CAs for internal purposes, e.g., to issue SSL server certificates to systems running intranet applications, to issue individual SSL client certificates for employees or contractors for use in authenticating to such applications, and so on. | ||
#* These sub-CAs are not functioning as public CAs, so typical Mozilla users would not encounter certificates issued by these sub-CAs in their normal activities. | #* These sub-CAs are not functioning as public CAs, so typical Mozilla users would not encounter certificates issued by these sub-CAs in their normal activities. | ||
#* For these sub-CAs we need assurance that they are not going to start functioning as public CAs. Currently the only | #* For these sub-CAs we need assurance that they are not going to start functioning as public CAs. Currently the only assurances available for this case it to ensure that these third parties are required to follow practices that satisfy the [http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/certs/policy/ Mozilla CA Certificate Policy,] and that these third parties are under an acceptable audit regime. | ||
#* Please see the [[CA:SubordinateCA_checklist#Third-Party_Private_(or_Enterprise)_Subordinate_CAs|section below]] which outlines the additional information that must be provided for | #** Note: Mozilla is investigating ways to programmatically ensure that these types of sub-CAs are only able to issue certificates within their domain. | ||
#* Please see the [[CA:SubordinateCA_checklist#Third-Party_Private_(or_Enterprise)_Subordinate_CAs|section below]] which outlines the additional information that must be provided for third-party private (or enterprise) subordinate CAs. | |||
== Third-Party Private (or Enterprise) Subordinate CAs == | == Third-Party Private (or Enterprise) Subordinate CAs == | ||