CA/Symantec Issues: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
More edits
(Add letters)
(More edits)
Line 73: Line 73:
===Further Comments and Conclusion===
===Further Comments and Conclusion===


Mozilla did not object to these qualifications in Symantec's audits at the time the audit documentation was submitted to us. Because of this, it is not reasonable for us to take action based on the mere existence of these qualifications. They are listed here because they are one part of the general picture of Symantec's compliance or otherwise with the BRs. An audit with any qualifications at all is not particularly common among CAs; six qualification is a lot.
Mozilla did not object to these qualifications in Symantec's audits at the time the audit documentation was submitted to us. Because of this, it is not reasonable for us to take action based on the mere existence of these qualifications. They are listed here because they are one part of the general picture of Symantec's compliance or otherwise with the BRs. An audit with any qualifications at all is not particularly common among CAs.


==Issue H: SHA-1 Issuance After Deadline (January 2016)==
==Issue H: SHA-1 Issuance After Deadline (January 2016)==
Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
4,925

edits

Navigation menu