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):||10 September 2012|
|PDF File Size:||12.29 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.92 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Some national evaluation schemes are phasing out EAL-based evaluations and only accept products for evaluation that claim strict conformance with an approved PP.
In contrast, much FOSS software is produced using modern agile paradigms. 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. Whether you run Microsoft Windows in the precise evaluated configuration or not, you should apply Microsoft’s security patches for the vulnerabilities in Windows as they continue to appear.
Objections outlined in the article include:. Webarchive template wayback links Interlanguage link template link number. Common Criteria certification cannot guarantee security, but it can ensure that claims about the security attributes of the evaluated product were isp verified.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The compliance with ISO is typically demonstrated to a National approval authority:. Based on this and other assumptions, which may not be realistic for the common use of general-purpose operating systems, the claimed security functions of the Windows products are evaluated. 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.
Standard ISO/IEC 15408, CC v3.1. Release 4
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 154008-2 of threats faced by the product in that environment. This page was last edited on 6 Decemberat ISO standards by standard number.
There is some concern that this may have a negative impact on mutual recognition. This shows both the limitation and strength of an evaluated configuration.
Additionally, the CC recognizes a need to limit the scope of evaluation in order to provide cost-effective and useful security certifications, such that evaluated products are examined to a level of detail specified by the assurance level or PP. 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.
The UK has also produced a number of alternative schemes when the timescales, costs and overheads of mutual recognition have been found 154408-2 be impeding the operation of the market:.
Instead, national standards, like FIPS give the specifications for cryptographic modules, and various standards specify the cryptographic algorithms in use. Evaluations at EAL5 and above tend to involve the security requirements of the host nation’s government.
Although some have argued that both paradigms do not align well,  others have attempted to reconcile both paradigms. Evaluations activities are therefore only performed to a certain depth, use of time, and resources and offer reasonable assurance for the intended environment.
Wheeler suggested that the Common Criteria process discriminates against free and open-source software FOSS -centric organizations and development models. It is currently in version 3. 51408-2 they should only be considered secure in the assumed, specified circumstances, also known as the evaluated configuration.
Common Criteria – Wikipedia
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:. In Sept ofthe Common Criteria published a Vision Statement implementing to a large extent Chris Salter’s thoughts from the previous year. In Septembera majority of members of the CCRA produced a vision statement whereby mutual recognition of CC evaluated products will be lowered to EAL 2 Including augmentation with flaw remediation.
Major changes to the Arrangement include:. Archived from the original on August 1, 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. 1408-2
Standard ISO/IEC , CC v Release 4
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. This will be achieved through technical working groups developing worldwide PPs, and as yet a transition period has not been fully determined. Computer security standards Evaluation of computers ISO standards.
Other standards containing, e. List of International Electrotechnical Commission standards. 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 isi. 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.
In a research paper, computer specialist David A. 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. Views Read Edit View history. Archived from the original PDF on April 17, Common Criteria certification is sometimes specified for IT procurement.
isl There are no security requirements that address the need to trust external systems or the communications links to such systems. In this approach, communities of interest form around technology types which in turn develop protection profiles that define the evaluation methodology for the technology 15408-22. Retrieved from ” https: As well as the Common Criteria standard, 15408–2 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.
Canada is in the process of phasing out EAL-based evaluations. CC was produced by unifying these pre-existing standards, predominantly so that companies selling computer products for the government market mainly for Defence or Intelligence use would only need to have them evaluated against one set of standards.