A platform approach to certifying
Smart card ICs
Presented byMike Paterson, Hitachi Europe Ltd.
Smart Card Security Conference, TOKYO, 29th March 2001

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile1

Acknowledgements

This IC Protection Profile is the result of a joint development project between
the Smart card IC manufacturers:

Atmel, Hitachi, Infineon Technologies and Philips Semiconductors- in collaboration with debis IT Security Services and under the German Common Criteria
Evaluation Scheme, administered by theBundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile2

Why we need a new IC PP• The only established hardware PP has demonstrated
the usefulness of a hardware-only approach, but:– it was not designed with multi-application cards anddownloadable applications in mind
– it was not designed to be fully modular and easily re-usable…in other words, it was not designed to produce results that aremovable between different end-products, different labs., oreven different certification bodies• Many of the card vendors and issuers are looking for
an improved approach for their multiple hardware
evaluation requirements.
29-Mar-01 µPIC Platform Protection Profile3

Overview•••••••

Benefits
What the “Platform” concept means
Relationship with other PPs
Scope and Concept of the IC Platform PPUsageStatus and Schedule
Key questions for PP users

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile4

Benefits of the IC PP• Enabling a platform approach for Smart card
Certification using the Common Criteria (ISO 15408)– more cost effective – one evaluation per platform– less time for card evaluation and certification– better comparability between platforms, evaluations andresults– re-use of evaluation efforts, results and certificates– modularity simplifies certificate maintenance.

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile5

The “Platform” concept…
• The IC platform is the basis for supplying a wide
variety of products and services on smart cards andso we want to be able to specify and evaluate itssecurity• The TOE is defined as a processing unit (CPU),
security components, I/O ports, memories and any
IC-dedicated software, which:– provides functions to the O/S and applications– protects user programs and user data (the assets)– gives security assurance, based on the correct development
and production processes– can be easily enhanced with additional features.
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

6

…for Modularity…
The Platform approach is designed to be modular…
– the Security Target for each IC will be a combination of the requirements ofthe certified IC Platform PP and a list of functional augmentations
IC Platform Protection Profile
Smart card Integrated Circuit
mandatory requirements

IC Functional Augmentations
Smart card Integrated Circuit
additional features, e.g.:

PPDES

MMU

RSA

OtherSecurity Targets for different smart card integrated circuits (#1,2,3)

ST129-Mar-01 µP

or

ST2

IC Platform Protection Profile

orST3
7

…Re-use and Flexibility (1)today

SW1SW2SW1IC1IC1IC2

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation• Today, you can in theory re-use evaluation results• In practice there are too many constraints:– same Evaluation lab. and Certification Body
– same hardware and software developers– no effective separation between h/w and s/w

Ö THREE FULL EVALUATIONS ARE USUALLY REQUIRED
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

8

…Re-use and Flexibility (2)••Separate evaluations for h/w & s/w, with a clear description of theinterfaces
Re-use of results for different combinations of:– h/w, s/w, labs. and certification bodies•

Substantially reduced effort for the evaluation of the combined product...infuture

SW1

SW2

SW1

IC1

IC1

IC2

1st Evaluation

29-Mar-01 µP

2nd Evaluation

IC Platform Protection Profile

3rd Evaluation

9

…Re-use and Flexibility (2)••Separate evaluations for h/w & s/w, with a clear description of theinterfaces
Re-use of results for different combinations of:– h/w, s/w, labs. and certification bodies•

Substantially reduced effort for the evaluation of the combined product...infuture

SW1

SW2

IC1

1st Evaluation

29-Mar-01 µP

SW1
IC2

2nd Evaluation

IC Platform Protection Profile

3rd Evaluation

10

…Re-use and Flexibility (2)••Separate evaluations for h/w & s/w, with a clear description of theinterfaces
Re-use of results for different combinations of:– h/w, s/w, labs. and certification bodies•

Substantially reduced effort for the evaluation of the combined product...infuture

SW1

SW2

IC11st Evaluation

IC2

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

Certifying a new product will not require the re-evaluationof previously certified parts (i.e. IC1 or SW1)
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

11

…Re-use and Flexibility (3)
today

SW1

SW2

SW1

IC1

IC1

IC2

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

SW1

SW2

SW1

IC1

IC1

IC2

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

Effort...infuture

Effort29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

12

…Re-use and Flexibility (3)
today

SW1

SW2

SW1

IC1

IC1IC2

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

SW1

SW2

SW1

Effort...infuture

IC2

IC1

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

Effort29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

13

…Re-use and Flexibility (3)
today

SW1

SW2

SW1

IC1

IC1

IC2

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

3rd Evaluation

SW1

SW2

Effort...infuture

IC2

IC1

1st Evaluation

2nd Evaluation

Effort29-Mar-01 µP

3rd Evaluation
BENEFITIC Platform Protection Profile

14

Relationship with other PPs
PP 9911SCSUG

PP 9806(ICpackage)

FuturePP ?

IC Platform PP• The IC Platform Protection Profile is designed tocover:– PP/9806– The IC package, from the SCSUG PP
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile15

Scope and Concept of the PPConfidentiality and integrity of theTOE during design andmanufacture are covered byrefinements to the assurancerequirements.
Threats against the TOE itself,
throughout its lifecycle, are coveredby objectives for the TOE (andtherefore by functional requirements)• A generic approach to describing threats ensures the validity ofthe PP, even if new attacks occur• The evaluation scheme must ensure that a ‘state-of-the-art’ setof attack methods is always used
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

16

Usage• The modularity and re-use can only happen if:– the individual evaluations are planned as modular ones, fromthe outset– the documentation available for re-users is adequate– true and effective mutual recognition is achieved• A model for modular evaluations has been proposedby the major smart card IC manufacturers…

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

17

Model for evaluation re-use(TOE manufacturer)

UGM(Evaluators &special interest groups)

STTOE
DesigndataPP(Evaluator report)

CC evaluation

Evaluator report:
ETR(Users)

User report:

ST, ETR-lite & UGM

Certification report,ST-lite & UGM

IC Platform Protection Profile

18(Certification bodies)
29-Mar-01 µP

Definitions and Assumptions for
effective re-use• User Guidance Manual– information required for a software developer to make correct andoptimum use of the security features of the TOE• ETR-lite– an approved subset of the Evaluation Technical Report (ETR),
sufficient for a second evaluator to integrate the results• ST-lite– an approved subset of the Security Target, suitable for generalpublication• Principal assumptions– harmonisation of lab. accreditation requirements– agreement on the contents of ETR-lite and ST-lite documents

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile19

Status of the PP•
••
•
•
•

Start of process: February 2000
Agreement on PP development: June 2000
Presentation of Platform concept: October 2000
First draft issued for comment: B/December 2000
Final draft issued for comment: E/March 2001
Deadline for comments: E/April 2001

• Goal for submission to certifier: B/May 2001
• Goal for certification of PP: June 2001
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

20

Key questions for PP users• Does the PP address the security threats that yourapplication requires?
• Is the PP re-usable and transportable between:– different O/S and applications software,– different Evaluation Labs.,– different Certification Bodies?

• Is the PP internationally recognised?
• What will be your cost and effort to update anevaluation?

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile21

In conclusion• We believe that this new PP can help to make theCommon Criteria more practical and effective forsmart card developers, because of:– maximum re-use and modularity under the CC scheme– faster, incremental evaluations– extensive consultation with smart card IC users and…
– a lower cost per product

The latest draft of the IC Platform Protection Profile
can be downloaded from:http:¥¥www.bsi.de/cc/pplist.htm
29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

22

And finally…
• Thanks to my colleagues at Atmel, Hitachi, Infineon
and Philips for the strong collaboration to make thisnew IC Platform Protection Profile a useful andeffective new standard for the smart card market, and• …thanks to debis IT security services andBundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik
for their help in developing this Protection Profile

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile

23

Thank you

Atmel, Hitachi, Infineon Technologies and Philips
Semiconductors

29-Mar-01 µP

IC Platform Protection Profile24