There are no certificates revoked in either the ComsignCA.crl or ComsignSecuredCA.crl. I do not know if this would be the cause of the ffffe009 error.
-Kyle H On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 2:56 AM, <stefan.claes...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 24, 10:42 pm, Frank Hecker <hec...@mozillafoundation.org> > wrote: >> Kathleen Wilson wrote: >> > As per the CA Schedule athttps://wiki.mozilla.org/CA:ScheduleComSign >> > is the next request in the queue for public discussion. >> >> Thanks for preparing this for public discussion! >> >> > * CRL issue: Current CRLs result in the ffffe009 error code when >> > downloading into Firefox. ComSign has removed the critical flag from >> > the CRL, and the new CRLs will be generated in April. >> >> Do we know for sure that the problem was due to the CIDP extension? Your >> comments in the bug imply that, but I don't see a definitive answer from >> Comsign on this point. >> >> If Comsign is using CIDP, are they doing partitioned CRLs like Hongkong >> Post? Or is the CRL a full CRL? >> >> Frank >> >> -- >> Frank Hecker >> hec...@mozillafoundation.org > > Hi, > > I am Stefan from ComSign. > > Someone from ComSign told Kathleen that we removed the > critical flag but obviously this was a misunderstanding since we dont > use the CIDP in our Crl`s > > Here are the CDP`s for the CA crl`s. > > http://fedir.comsign.co.il/crl/ComSignCA.crl > http://fedir.comsign.co.il/crl/ComSignSecuredCA.crl > > Is CIDP required to use in a crl? > > Stefan > -- > dev-tech-crypto mailing list > dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto > -- dev-tech-crypto mailing list dev-tech-crypto@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-crypto
