Podcast
Root Causes 290: What Are QGIS and QIIS?


Hosted by
Tim Callan
Chief Compliance Officer
Jason Soroko
Fellow
Original broadcast date
March 30, 2023
In this episode we define Qualified Government Information Source (QGIS) and Qualified Independent Information Source (QIIS), which are critical to CABF-compliant organization validation. We explain how they fit into validation and the criteria for a reliable information source.
Podcast Transcript
Lightly edited for flow and brevity.
So, QGIS stands for Qualified Government Information Source and QIIS stands for Qualified Independent Information Source. And, if we break down these words, qualified means not just anything. It has to meet certain criteria to be considered to be usable. Let’s go to the end. Information source – this is some source of information that’s out in the world that you can use to get information about an entity. So, this would be an organization, a business, a government organization, an NGO, a school, a church, something like that. And there are many, many, many information sources in the world that you and I look to to understand what something is. What a business is.
So, let’s just use an easy example. Let’s say the yellow pages. So, remember when we all had yellow pages in our homes in a drawer in the kitchen and it was a thick book and it was yellow and strong people used to rip them in half to be impressive? So, we’d have these things and if somebody said, hey, I want to get my washing machine repaired, you’d flip to washing machine repair and you’d find somebody and you’d have a pretty high degree of confidence that that was actually a washing machine repair shop and not, let’s say, something else. Like someone pretending to be a washing machine repair shop. So, we would use the yellow pages as an information source.
Now, where all this comes to play is these information sources are part of the CA/Browser Forum rules. The baseline requirements and the EVGs and basically anything that we are going to assert about a business needs to be independently confirmed. So, we can’t use self-reported information from that business or that government agency or that NGO or whoever it is. We have to get that directly from these independent information sources and they have to be qualified. So there are a set of criteria. Basically, what it comes down to is it can’t be self-reported information. It can’t be something where I just go tell it. So there are lots and lots of places and databases where you can just go tell it and there are also lots of places and databases where you can’t just tell it. Where they have some method in place to ensure that the information that you are saying is correct. It’s that second set of information sources that we as CAs are allowed to use and that’s where the qualified comes in.
Now there’s two versions. There’s what we call government and independent. So government is just that. It’s something that comes from the government. It’s an official list of registered businesses or it’s an official list of schools or it’s an official list of government agencies with the set of information that is adequate for the CA to determine what it needs to know about that organization and it’s coming directly from a government and we call that a QGIS – a Qualified Government Information Source and that is considered to be a very robust information source. Because after all, those are the people who are in charge of the law and if they’re going to declare that these are the schools, kind of almost by definition they are right.
Then the other ones though are basically services that are maintained. Usually they are paid services where they focus on quality and they make sure that what’s in their information is right and there’s lots and lots and lots of businesses that use these services and need them in various ways and depend on them being accurate. So, it is worthwhile for somebody to run a business where they are literally looking at these information sources; they are vetting their information; they are confirming that it’s correct and they are making it available in some kind of data lookup capacity. And that would be called a Qualified Independent Information Source and CAs use both of these. They use them quite extensively and that is an essential part. Without these information sources you kind of can’t have a CA industry at all.
So, if you are thinking about a DV, a domain validated certificate, there is only DCV. Organizational validation does not occur. So under those circumstances, there are no QIISs. There are no QGISs. So for a CA that only offers DV – and some of them exist – they don’t need to worry about this stuff. They don’t care. They don’t have any QIISs. They don’t have any QGISs. They just don’t care. But for CAs that are offering OV and EV, which is most of them, then they do care and they have to do this correctly and they have to follow everything that I just laid out.
And #2 is, there is a more general rule which is that the CA has to, in the event that the CA learns that any of its certificates don’t have reliable organization validation information then those certificates need to be revoked. That winds up being the thing that really has teeth. You can’t use an unreliable QIIS because then anything that depends on that QIIS itself becomes unreliable and therefore, according to the rules, it must be revoked. That’s really where the strength comes from. So, there is a motivator for CAs to do this well. Not to mention the fact if they don’t do it well and they’re issuing certs to organizations that don’t exist, then because of CT log certificate transparency and because of tools like CRT.SH, it is possible for members of the community to discover these errors and bring them up and they have. They do. And when they bring them up, guess what? Now you have a Bug and Bugzilla and you have that whole problem. You have a forced revocation event. You have kind of the loss of public credit and loss of face. That’s very important. If you look at the three root distrust events that have occurred in the last four years or so, for two of the three there was a strong element of failure to execute properly, which was part of the reason the distrust occurred. CAs take this kind of thing very seriously and failure to execute properly in the CA world is a very serious allegation. That’s where the teeth and the strength comes from in all of this and it’s pretty strong. It’s effective in forcing CAs to take this kind of thing seriously.
To actually guarantee that something is who it says it is, who actually is in possession of that certificate, is actually utilizing it. There’s been a lot said over the years about the efficacy of EV certificates, but I will tell you that in terms of verification processes, it’s rigorous and there’s a lot to it. And, like I say, people do take this really seriously on all sides. It’s a big topic. It’s in the weeds but it’s really at the heart of how these things are done properly.

