← Sectigo cases
Bugzilla #1714193 Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident

Sectigo: Incorrect locality information

RESOLVED FIXED Sectigo
This summary was auto-generated by AI and revised by me when needed — accuracy improves with each update. Always refer to the official Bugzilla thread as the authoritative source. If you spot an inaccuracy, let me know via the contact form.
AI Summary

Sectigo identified two certificates issued with incorrect localityName and postalCode information during an internal audit on May 6, 2021. Both certificates were issued to the same organization and contained identical errors. Following the discovery, Sectigo scheduled the revocation of the certificates, which occurred on May 10, 2021. The CA has since removed the RA privileges of the partner responsible for the erroneous certificates and is implementing measures to prevent similar issues in the future. The incident has been resolved with the certificates revoked and the partner's RA privileges removed.

Model: gpt-4o-mini Generated: 2026-06-13 20:58 UTC Revised: 2026-06-16 18:51 UTC Confidence: 0.90 13 comments
Chronology
  1. Internal audit discovers two certificates with incorrect locality and postal code information.
  2. Both certificates are revoked.
  3. RA privileges of the partner responsible for the erroneous certificates are removed.
Thread Activity
  1. Sectigo — Sectigo's internal audit team discovered two certificates with incorrect localityName and postalCode information.
  2. Thisisntrocket representative — Requested clarification on how the certificates were discovered and why it took time to report the issue.
  3. Sectigo — Explained the timeline and reasons for the delay in reporting the issue.
  4. Sectigo — Confirmed the removal of RA privileges as scheduled.
  5. Sectigo — Provided updates on the compliance process and the status of the RA partner.
  6. Community commenter — Inquired about the RA partner's suggestions and the implications for RA management.
  7. Sectigo — Clarified that no incident report was required from the RA partner and discussed the future of their privileges.
  8. Mozilla representative — Indicated intention to close the matter.
Participants
Community commenter
External References
Similar Local Cases
#1715929 RESOLVED Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident Opened 2021-06-11 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 100% similar
Sectigo: Incorrect EV businessCategory
#1714628 RESOLVED Incident Self Reported Incident Opened 2021-06-04 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 96% similar
Sectigo: Forbidden Domain Validation Method
#1736064 RESOLVED Ca Certificate Compliance Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident Opened 2021-10-15 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 94% similar
Sectigo: Subject field with unvalidated information included in certificates
#1715024 RESOLVED Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident Opened 2021-06-07 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 91% similar
Sectigo: Misspellings in stateOrProvince or localityName fields
#1548713 RESOLVED Self Reported Incident Revocation Issue Opened 2019-05-02 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 90% similar
Sectigo: "Default City" in Subject:localityName
#1551362 RESOLVED Self Reported Incident Revocation Issue Opened 2019-05-14 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 90% similar
Sectigo: "Some-State" in stateOrProvinceName
#1575022 RESOLVED Ca Certificate Compliance Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident Opened 2019-08-19 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 89% similar
Sectigo: EV SSL Certificates with incorrect subject details.
#1740493 RESOLVED Ca Certificate Compliance Certificate Misissuance Self Reported Incident Opened 2021-11-10 · Closed 2023-02-22 · 88% similar
Sectigo: Failure to block disallowed LDH labels in domain names

We use only essential cookies and local browser storage for preferences and security. See our Privacy Policy for details.

Confirm action