Yehoshua, Your message (below) appears to put the IAWG into stasis, as if it has no further purpose (or at least, hasn’t at the present). That cannot be so, however. The Approval scheme continues to function and needs to be supported with up-to-date criteria, notices and correct and accurate statements on the TSL page. We’ve been told that these matters were going to be addressed but they haven’t been, and the failure to resolve them is creating, and will further create, problems with ongoing Assessments and Approval renewals. I request that the IAWG has a meeting to address the following points, all of which are unfinished business from 2024 which the potential arrival of an Accredited CB appears to have pushed aside. My concerns are: Regarding the SACs: 1) Comp Alt criteria were reintroduced into the discussion and I was of the view that they were to be included in a revised 63A_SAC; 2) Proofing strength combos – we agreed that 63A#0180 was worthy of amendment to accommodate STRONG+ and greater break-down to individual pieces of evidence, to better support component proofing services; 3) editorials – quite a few have been noted along the way and ‘stored’ for publication, and a recent assessment I’ve been involved in has led to a number of additional minor editorial changes being identified (one actually was a criterion mis-numbering, which is a little above ‘minor editorial’); 4) definitive ‘passkey waiver’ criteria – the IAWG never concluded its discussion about which criteria ought to be subject to a Notice, and the published Notice was therefore produced prematurely. This is problematic since other criteria are (I believe) worthy of inclusion, which presents a problem if assessments are performed with such findings yet the Notice does not support them. I have previously offered to provide publishable revisions for the affected SACs but the meeting was advised that these would be dealt with by ‘staff’. Regarding the TSL web pages: 5) The definitions for Full Service and Component Service are incorrect, i.e. they do not align to the KI Glossary; 6) The TSL split between services is incorrect – they are grouped as ‘Full’, ‘Classic’ and ‘Component’. This is completely wrong – the distinction between Full and Component is equally applicable to both ‘Classic’ and ’63 rev.3’ services. At least one of the present ‘Classic’ listed services is a Component Service; The above problems have existed for months. More recently: 7) KI has been added as an Assessor under the existing Approval scheme. I consider this to be ethically challenged and believe that this entry should be removed. Hopefully catch everyone at a meeting this week to deal with last year’s business … then we can see whether we have any for 2025. Richard G. WILSHER CEO & Founder, Zygma Inc. www.Zygma.biz +1 714 797 9942 From: Yehoshua Silberstein [mailto:yehoshua@proof.com] Sent: Monday, February 24, 2025 18:52 To: IAWG Subject: [WG-IDAssurance] Election Results & Feb. 27 Meeting Cancelation Hi everyone, Following our recent elections, I’m honored to serve as the new Chair of the IAWG, with Andrew as Vice-Chair. We look forward to working with all of you in our new roles. In the meantime, we’re canceling this week’s IAWG meeting (and potentially next week’s) as we work with Carol and Kay to better understand and clarify the roles, responsibilities, and structure of the new program. Our goal is to gather the necessary details to help you understand how this will take shape, and we’ll follow up once we have more to share and confirm the next meeting date. Thanks, Yehoshua -- Yehoshua Silberstein | Senior Counsel, Product Compliance R&D yehoshua@proof.com (857) 577-8144 <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/7nPoP42JZWBh2Tlgr4Pk7-Xw-dNkaxwcdqDAvNQRyg6qsp8AF5yG2dS_GVGlTxN6HOjmQLy9Gz7BLQ6Mof1AGW2HvWNr9qo5ClraeV3cMw3mbQNSeXhW9MXLV7riSDcQQdKXYCRwkHzOaTP8sxWYhmo> Notarize is now a Proof brand 🎉 We hope you love our new look and feel as much as we do! NOTICE: This email may contain proprietary, business-confidential, and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. This email does not constitute a signed writing for purposes of a binding contract.