ISO/IEC. Third edition. Information technology — Security techniques — Evaluation criteria for IT security —. Part 2: Security functional. ISO/IEC (E). PDF disclaimer. This PDF file may contain embedded typefaces. In accordance with Adobe’s licensing policy, this file. The Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation is an international standard (ISO/IEC ) for computer security certification.
|Published (Last):||4 April 2013|
|PDF File Size:||13.11 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.89 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Further, this vision indicates a move away from assurance levels altogether and evaluations will be confined to conformance with Protection Profiles that have no stated assurance level. In this 1540-82, communities of interest form around technology types which in turn develop protection profiles that define the evaluation methodology for the technology type.
Standard ISO/IEC , CC v Release 4
Common Criteria is very generic; it does not directly provide a list 1540-82 product security requirements or features for specific classes of products: Various Microsoft Windows versions, including Windows Server and Windows XPhave been certifiedbut security patches to address security vulnerabilities are still getting published by Microsoft for these Windows systems.
Key elements of the Vision included:. In a research paper, computer specialist David A. Characteristics of these organizations were examined and presented at ICCC In other words, products evaluated against a Common Criteria standard exhibit a clear chain of evidence that the process of specification, implementation, and evaluation has been conducted in a rigorous and standard manner. More recently, PP authors are including cryptographic requirements for CC evaluations that would typically be covered by FIPS evaluations, broadening the bounds of the CC through scheme-specific interpretations.
In Septembera majority of members of the CCRA produced a vision isp whereby mutual recognition of CC evaluated products will be lowered to EAL 2 Including augmentation with flaw remediation.
This will be achieved through technical working groups developing worldwide PPs, and as yet a transition period has not been sio determined. Although some have argued that both paradigms do not align well,  others have attempted to reconcile both paradigms. In contrast, much FOSS software is produced using modern agile paradigms.
Instead, national standards, like FIPS give the iiso for cryptographic modules, and various standards specify the cryptographic algorithms in use. Thus they should only be considered secure in the assumed, specified circumstances, also known as the evaluated configuration.
Evaluations activities are therefore only performed to a certain depth, use of time, and resources and offer reasonable assurance for the intended environment. Based on this and other jso, which may not be realistic for the common use of general-purpose operating systems, the claimed security functions of the Windows products are evaluated.
As well as the Common Criteria standard, there is also a sub-treaty level Common Criteria MRA Mutual Recognition Arrangementwhereby each party thereto recognizes evaluations against the Common Criteria standard done by other parties. Failure by the vendor to take either of these steps would result in involuntary withdrawal of the product’s certification by the certification body of the country in which the product was evaluated.
Standard ISO/IEC 15408, CC v3.1. Release 4
There are no security requirements that address the need to trust external systems or the communications links to such systems. Wheeler suggested that the Common Criteria process 1548-2 against free and open-source software FOSS -centric organizations and development models.
This is possible because the process of obtaining a Common Criteria certification allows a vendor to restrict the analysis to certain security features and to make certain assumptions about the operating environment and the strength of threats faced by the product in that environment. The evaluation process also tries to establish the level of confidence that may be placed in the product’s security features through quality assurance processes:. If any of these security vulnerabilities are exploitable in the product’s evaluated configuration, the product’s Common Criteria certification should be voluntarily withdrawn by the vendor.
CC was produced by unifying these pre-existing standards, predominantly so that companies selling computer products oso the government market mainly for Defence or Intelligence use would only need to have them evaluated against one set of standards. The compliance with ISO is typically demonstrated to a National approval authority:.
Webarchive template wayback links Interlanguage link template link number. Objections outlined in the article include:. Archived from the original PDF on 15408-22 17, The United States 154082- only allows PP-based evaluations.
Alternatively, the vendor should re-evaluate the product to include the application of patches to fix the security vulnerabilities within the evaluated configuration. This page was last edited on 6 Decemberat The UK has also produced a number of alternative schemes when the timescales, costs and overheads of mutual recognition have been found to be impeding the operation of the market:.
In other words, Common Criteria provides assurance that the process of specification, implementation and evaluation of a computer security product has been conducted in a rigorous and standard and repeatable manner at a level that is commensurate with the target environment for use. This shows both the limitation and strength of an evaluated configuration. Vendors can then implement or make claims about the security attributes of their products, and testing laboratories can evaluate the products to determine if they actually meet the claims.
There is some concern that this may have a negative impact on mutual recognition. The TOE is applicable to networked or distributed environments only if the entire network operates under the same constraints and resides within a single management domain.
Common Criteria – Wikipedia
Computer security standards Evaluation of computers ISO standards. Some national evaluation schemes are phasing out EAL-based evaluations and only accept products for evaluation that claim strict conformance with an approved PP. Other standards containing, e. Views Read Edit View history. In Sept ofthe Common Criteria published a Vision Statement implementing to a large extent Chris Salter’s thoughts from the previous year.
Major changes to the Arrangement include:.