Source: http://docplayer.net/2599960-Bsi-dsz-cc-0675-2011-for-nxp-j3a081-j2a081-and-j3a041-secure-smart-card-controller-revision-3-from-nxp-semiconductors-germany-gmbh.html
Timestamp: 2019-01-16 18:09:40
Document Index: 320219330

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 2', 'art 3']

BSI-DSZ-CC for. NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3. from. NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH - PDF
BSI-DSZ-CC for. NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3. from. NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH
Download "BSI-DSZ-CC-0675-2011. for. NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3. from. NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH"
1 BSI-DSZ-CC for NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 from NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH
2 BSI - Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik, Postfach , D Bonn Phone +49 (0) , Fax +49 (0) , Infoline +49 (0) Certification Report V1.0 CC-Zert-327 V4.5
3 BSI-DSZ-CC Smart Card with Java Card Platform NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 from PP Conformance: Functionality: Assurance: NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH None Common Criteria Part 2 extended Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement for components up to EAL 4 The IT product identified in this certificate has been evaluated at an approved evaluation facility using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 4 and guidance specific for the technology of the product for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.1. This certificate applies only to the specific version and release of the product in its evaluated configuration and in conjunction with the complete Certification Report. The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the certification scheme of the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) and the conclusions of the evaluation facility in the evaluation technical report are consistent with the evidence adduced. This certificate is not an endorsement of the IT product by the Federal Office for Information Security or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this certificate, and no warranty of the IT product by the Federal Office for Information Security or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this certificate, is either expressed or implied. Bonn, 06 April 2011 For the Federal Office for Information Security Joachim Weber L.S. Head of Division Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik Godesberger Allee D Bonn - Postfach D Bonn Phone +49 (0) Fax +49 (0) Infoline +49 (0)
6 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC Contents A Certification Specifications of the Certification Procedure Recognition Agreements European Recognition of ITSEC/CC Certificates (SOGIS-MRA) International Recognition of CC Certificates (CCRA) Performance of Evaluation and Certification Validity of the Certification Result Publication...9 B Certification Results Executive Summary Identification of the TOE Security Policy Assumptions and Clarification of Scope Architectural Information Documentation IT Product Testing Developer's Test according to ATE_FUN Evaluator's Test according to ATE_IND Penetration Testing according to AVA_VAN Evaluated Configuration Results of the Evaluation CC specific results Results of cryptographic assessment Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE Security Target Definitions Acronyms Glossary Bibliography...24 C Excerpts from the Criteria...27 D Annexes / 40
7 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report A Certification 1 Specifications of the Certification Procedure The certification body conducts the procedure according to the criteria laid down in the following: BSIG 2 BSI Certification Ordinance 3 BSI Schedule of Costs 4 Special decrees issued by the Bundesministerium des Innern (Federal Ministry of the Interior) DIN EN standard BSI certification: Procedural Description (BSI 7125) [3] Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version [1] Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 [2] BSI certification: Application Notes and Interpretation of the Scheme (AIS) [4] 2 Recognition Agreements In order to avoid multiple certification of the same product in different countries a mutual recognition of IT security certificates - as far as such certificates are based on ITSEC or CC - under certain conditions was agreed. 2.1 European Recognition of ITSEC/CC Certificates (SOGIS-MRA) The SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement (SOGIS-MRA) Version 3 became effective in April It defines the recognition of certificates for IT-Products at a basic recognition level and in addition at higher recognition levels for IT-Products related to certain technical domains only. The basic recognition level includes Common Criteria (CC) Evaluation Assurance Levels EAL1 to EAL4 and ITSEC Evaluation Assurance Levels E1 to E3 (basic). For higher recognition levels the technical domain Smart card and similar Devices has been defined. It includes assurance levels beyond EAL4 resp. E3 (basic). The new agreement was initially signed by the national bodies of Finland, France, Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. 2 Act on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Gesetz - BSIG) of 14 August 2009, Bundesgesetzblatt I p Ordinance on the Procedure for Issuance of a Certificate by the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Zertifizierungsverordnung, BSIZertV) of 07 July 1992, Bundesgesetzblatt I p Schedule of Cost for Official Procedures of the Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik (BSI-Kostenverordnung, BSI-KostV) of 03 March 2005, Bundesgesetzblatt I p Proclamation of the Bundesministerium des Innern of 12 February 2007 in the Bundesanzeiger dated 23 February 2007, p / 40
8 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC Within the terms of this agreement the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) recognises for the basic recognition level certificates issued as of April 2010 by the national certification bodies of France, The Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom. for the higher recognition level in the technical domain Smart card and similar Devices certificates issued as of April 2010 by the national certification bodies of France, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom. In addition, certificates issued for Protection Profiles based on Common Criteria are part of the recognition agreement. The SOGIS-MRA logo printed on the certificate indicates that it is recognised under the terms of this agreement. Historically, the first SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement Version 1 (ITSEC only) became initially effective in March It was extended in 1999 to include certificates based on the Common Criteria (MRA Version 2). Recognition of certificates previously issued under these older versions of the SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement is being continued. 2.2 International Recognition of CC Certificates (CCRA) An arrangement (Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement) on the mutual recognition of certificates based on the CC Evaluation Assurance Levels up to and including EAL 4 has been signed in May 2000 (CCRA). It includes also the recognition of Protection Profiles based on the CC. As of January 2009 the arrangement has been signed by the national bodies of: Australia, Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Republic of Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States of America. The current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes can be seen on the web site: The Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement logo printed on the certificate indicates that this certification is recognised under the terms of this agreement. This evaluation contains the components ADV_FSP.5, ADV_INT.2, ADV_TDS.4, ALC_CMS.5, ALC_DVS.2, ALC_TAT.2, ATE_DPT.3 and AVA_VAN.5 that are not mutually recognised in accordance with the provisions of the CCRA. For mutual recognition the EAL4 components of these assurance families are relevant. 3 Performance of Evaluation and Certification The certification body monitors each individual evaluation to ensure a uniform procedure, a uniform interpretation of the criteria and uniform ratings. The product NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 has undergone the certification procedure at BSI. This is a re-certification based on BSI- DSZ-CC Specific results from the evaluation process BSI-DSZ-CC were re-used. The evaluation of the product NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 was conducted by TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH. The evaluation 8 / 40
9 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report was completed on 05 April The TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH is an evaluation facility (ITSEF) 6 recognised by the certification body of BSI. For this certification procedure the sponsor and applicant is: The product was developed by: NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH. NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH. The certification is concluded with the comparability check and the production of this Certification Report. This work was completed by the BSI. 4 Validity of the Certification Result This Certification Report only applies to the version of the product as indicated. The confirmed assurance package is only valid on the condition that all stipulations regarding generation, configuration and operation, as given in the following report, are observed, the product is operated in the environment described, where specified in the following report and in the Security Target. For the meaning of the assurance levels please refer to the excerpts from the criteria at the end of the Certification Report. The Certificate issued confirms the assurance of the product claimed in the Security Target at the date of certification. As attack methods evolve over time, the resistance of the certified version of the product against new attack methods needs to be re-assessed. Therefore, the sponsor should apply for the certified product being monitored within the assurance continuity program of the BSI Certification Scheme (e.g. by a re-certification). Specifically, if results of the certification are used in subsequent evaluation and certification procedures, in a system integration process or if a user's risk management needs regularly updated results, it is recommended to perform a re-assessment on a regular e.g. annual basis. In case of changes to the certified version of the product, the validity can be extended to the new versions and releases, provided the sponsor applies for assurance continuity (i.e. re-certification or maintenance) of the modified product, in accordance with the procedural requirements, and the evaluation does not reveal any security deficiencies. 5 Publication The product NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 has been included in the BSI list of the certified products, which is published regularly (see also Internet: and [5]). Further information can be obtained from BSI-Infoline Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility 9 / 40
10 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC Further copies of this Certification Report can be requested from the developer 7 of the product. The Certification Report may also be obtained in electronic form at the internet address stated above. 7 NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH Stresemannallee Hamburg 10 / 40
12 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC Executive Summary The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the product NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3, also referred to shortly as JCOP v2.4.1 R3. The product type is identified as Java Card on the hardware P5CD081V1A and P5CC081V1A (BSI- DSZ-CC [18]) including a crypto library (BSI-DSZ-CC [15]). The TOE consists of the following components: Smart card platform (SCP) (parts of the hardware platform and hardware abstraction layer) and Embedded software (Java Card Virtual Machine, Runtime Environment, Java Card API, Card Manager). The J3A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 also includes the Native MIFARE application (physically present but logically disabled in minor configuration MIFARE Emulation = A and logically enabled in the minor configurations MIFARE Emulation = B1 and MIFARE Emulation = B4 (see section of the hardware Security Target [19])). The TOE is based on Java Card and GlobalPlatform industry standards. It does not include any software on the application layer (Java Card applets) whereby the TOE does not include some parts of the certified hardware platform [18]. For details refer to the Security Target [6] and [8]. The Security Target [6] is the basis for this certification. It does not claim conformance to any Protection Profile (PP) but it is based on the CC 2.1 certified Java Card PP [7]. The TOE Security Assurance Requirements (SAR) are based entirely on the assurance components defined in Part 3 of the Common Criteria (see part C or [1], Part 3 for details). The TOE meets the assurance requirements of the Evaluation Assurance Level EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5. The TOE Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the TOE are outlined in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 6. The TOE Security Functional Requirements are implemented by the following TOE Security Functionalities: TOE Security Functionality Addressed issue SF.AccessControl SF.Audit SF.CryptoKey SF.CryptoOperation SF.I&A SF.SecureManagement SF.PIN SF.Transaction SF.Hardware SF.CryptoLib Enforces the access control Audit functionality Cryptographic key management Cryptographic operation Identification and authentication Secure management of TOE resources PIN management Transaction management TSF of the underlying IC TSF of the certified crypto library Table 1: TOE Security Funktionalities 12 / 40
13 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report For more details please refer to the Security Target [6] abd [8], chapter 7.1. The assets to be protected by the TOE are defined in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 3.2. Based on these assets the TOE Security Environment is defined in terms of Assumptions, Threats and Organisational Security Policies. This is outlined in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5. The vulnerability assessment results as stated within this certificate do not include a rating for those cryptographic algorithms and their implementation suitable for encryption and decryption (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2). The certification results only apply to the version of the product indicated in the certificate and on the condition that all the stipulations are kept as detailed in this Certification Report. This certificate is not an endorsement of the IT product by the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this certificate, and no warranty of the IT product by BSI or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this certificate, is either expressed or implied. 2 Identification of the TOE The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is called: NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 The following table outlines the TOE deliverables: No Type Identifier Release Form of Delivery 1 HW/SW NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 including ROM mask and EEPROM patch Mask ID: 34h (52) Mask name: NX011D Patch ID: x1h ( x is different) Target ID: 00h (SmartMX) 2 DOC User Manual [12] Revision DOC Administrator Manual [13] Revision DOC HW Data Sheet [14] Revision Table 2: Deliverables of the TOE Sawn Wafer or embedded into specific module package Electronic PDF document, encrypted and signed Electronic PDF document, encrypted and signed Electronic PDF document, encrypted and signed The delivery process from NXP to their customers guarantees, that the customer is aware of the exact versions of the different parts of the TOE as outlined above. To ensure that the customer receives the evaluated version of the chip, the TOE is sent by NXP to the customer protected by special ordering, secured transport and tracking measures. Additionally, a Transport Key has to be used to support the secure delivery and the identification of the TOE. When packed sometimes it is not possible to identify the TOE (NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3) by sending commands to the TOE since there are no physical contacts available due to the production step. In that case the 13 / 40
14 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC identification is done by the commercial name of the product as described in the Administrator Manual [13], chapter 2.1 and Security Policy The TOE is the composition of an IC, IC Dedicated Software and Smart Card Embedded Software and is intended to be used as a Java Card platform and to be equipped with Java applets conformant to the Java Card standard. The Java Card Virtual Machine (JCVM) is responsible for ensuring language-level security. The basic runtime security feature imposed by the Java Card Runtime Environment (JCRE) enforces isolation of applets using an applet firewall. It prevents objects created by one applet from being used by another applet without explicit sharing. This prevents unauthorized access to the fields and methods of class instances, as well as the length and contents of arrays. The applet firewall is considered as the most important security feature. It enables complete isolation between applets or controlled communication through additional mechanisms that allow them to share objects when needed. The JCVM should ensure that the only way for applets to access any resources are either through the JCRE or through the Java Card API (or other vendor-specific APIs). The Card Manager is responsible for the management of applets in the card. No postissuance loading and deletion of applets is allowed for the present TOE. 4 Assumptions and Clarification of Scope The Assumptions defined in the Security Target and some aspects of Threats and organisational Security Policies are not covered by the TOE itself. These aspects lead to specific Security Objectives to be fulfilled by the TOE-Environment. The following topics are of relevance: OE.USE_DIAG: Secure TOE communication protocols shall be supported and used by the environment. OE.USE_KEYS: During the TOE usage, the terminal or system in interaction with the TOE, shall ensure the protection (integrity and confidentiality) of their own keys by operational means and/or procedures. OE.NATIVE: Those parts of the APIs written in native code as well as any pre-issuance native application on the card shall be conformant with the TOE so as to ensure that security policies and objectives described herein are not violated. OE.NO-DELETION: No installed applets (or packages) shall be deleted from the card. OE.NO-INSTALL: There is no post-issuance installation of applets. Installation of applets is secure and shall occur only in a controlled environment in the pre-issuance phase. OE.VERIFICATION: All the bytecodes shall be verified at least once, before the loading, before the installation or before the execution, depending on the card capabilities, in order to ensure that each bytecode is valid at execution time. Details can be found in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter / 40
15 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report 5 Architectural Information The TOE does not include any software on the Application Layer (Java Card applets) and does not include some parts of the Hardware Platform. This is shown schematically in the following figure: Figure 1: JCOP Architecture The Smart Card Platform (SCP) consists of the Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) and the Hardware Platform. The cryptographic library (Crypto Library) is part of the HAL. Not all functionality of the Crypto Library is used, but this unused functionality is not linked with the code and is therefore not part of the HAL. Instead this functionality is implemented in JCOP embedded software. All functions in the HAL are used by the TOE. Not all functionality of the Hardware Platform is used for the TOE functionality and exposed at external interfaces. Therefore, some parts of the Hardware Platform are not part of the TOE. The following functionality of the Smart Card Platform is not used for the composite TOE and not exposed at external interfaces: Hardware Special Function Register Access Control AES functionality of the Crypto Library (implemented by JCOP embedded SW instead) RSA functionality of the Crypto Library (implemented by JCOP embedded SW instead) Random Number Generator of the Crypto Library (implemented by JCOP embedded SW instead) Copy functionality of the Crypto Library (implemented by JCOP embedded SW instead) The Java Card System is intended to transform a Smart Card into a Platform Capable of executing applications written in a subset of the Java programming language. The intended use of a Java Card Platform is to provide a framework for implementing IC 15 / 40
16 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC independent applications conceived to safely coexist and interact with other applications into a single Smart Card. Applications installed on a Java Card Platform can be selected for execution when the card is inserted into a card reader. In some configurations of the TOE, the card reader may also be used to enlarge or restrict the set of applications that can be executed on the Java Card Platform according to a well-defined card management policy. 6 Documentation The evaluated documentation as outlined in table 2 is being provided with the product to the customer. This documentation contains the required information for secure usage of the TOE in accordance with the Security Target. Additional obligations and notes for secure usage of the TOE as outlined in chapter 10 of this report have to be followed. 7 IT Product Testing 7.1 Developer's Test according to ATE_FUN The test of the TOE NXP J3A081, J2A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 is divided into several distinct phases: Unit testing Integration testing and Acceptance testing. The overall goal of the tests is to show that the TOE implements the TSF as described by the Security Target and the Functional Specification. Since SF.Hardware is covered by the HW certification, the testing approach has been to verify that the recommendations from HW to the SW granted by the HW guidance are fulfilled by the embedded software instead of doing functional testing of the HW security functions again. Therefore most of the tests for HW functions are done via code inspections, unit tests or acceptance tests. Furthermore, the TOE requires compliancy to three core specifications: Java Card GlobalPlatform Visa GlobalPlatform CIR The tests to be executed refer to the test plans of these specifications in conjunction with two supported interfaces: Contact based - ISO7816, EMV 4.1 Contactless - ISO14443, ISO10373 Additionally NXP Semiconductors created tests to cover special areas of interest: Unit Tests Amendatory Java Card Tests All TSF, which are related to the core specifications, are tested with the main test suites used during acceptance testing. The test suites are: 16 / 40
17 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report JC-TCK 2.2.2, GP Official GP test suites, VGP Test suite used by VISA test labs. The acceptance tests are mainly done with externally developed test suites for testing compliance to the Java Card specifications. The product is a Java Card providing a platform for Java applets. Therefore the TOE is implemented according to well known specifications. The definition of TSF in [6] and [8] is based on the Java Card functionality defined in the specifications. Therefore the overall testing strategy is to prove for compliance to the specifications and there with to give proof for the correct implementation of the TSF. All the different configurations of the TOE (No MIFARE or MIFARE A, B1, B4; all with mask ID 52 and patch ID 1) have been tested successfully. 7.2 Evaluator's Test according to ATE_IND The evaluator s testing effort is described as follows, outlining the testing approach, configuration, depth and results. The samples used for testing have been the composite product, which means the JCOP SW part on the platform provided as SO28 samples. All samples have been provided with the following parameters: FABKEY ID: 0x02, PATCH ID: 0x41, TARGET ID: 0x00 (null), MASK ID: 0x34 (52), CUSTOM MASK: , MASK NAME: NX011D, FUSE STATE: not fused, ROM INFO: 58E957, COMBO NAME: null-m nx011d. The configuration has been different in COMBO NAME to the 3 major configurations A, B1 and B4 and J2A081 as stated in the Security Target [6] and [8]. The APDU and API interfaces are most significant for the TOE. Therefore they are most often used during testing and the test samples are provided as composite TOE consisting of a SO28 sample which can only be connected via adapter to a terminal using contact or contact less interface. The choice of the subset of interfaces used for testing has been done according to the following approach: Augmentation of developer testing for interfaces and supplementation of developer testing strategy for interfaces are both used for setting up test cases. The number of interfaces from which to draw upon for the test subset leads to focus on contact and contactless interface including MIFARE interface; Test Applets are used to perform functional testing (API interfaces are tested as well). Related to the complexity of interfaces the evaluator included repeating of all unit tests, JC-TCK tests and Global Platform tests each for one TOE configuration covering all interfaces. Repetition of the unit tests, JC-TCK tests and Global Platform tests using the external visible interfaces the independent testing covers all interfaces also the internal ones implicitly. Other types of interfaces are either covered by the hardware certificate [18] (e. g. electrical interfaces) or are not available (e. g. USB) or are implicitly included (e. g. contact less and ISO7816 APDU interface used to implicitly test the programming interfaces by test applets). 17 / 40
18 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC One stressed feature (BAC functionality) is completely covered by unit tests and additionally tested by the evaluator. During the evaluator s independent testing the TOE operated as specified. The evaluator found that all TSFI have been suitably tested, and all interfaces are properly implemented. 7.3 Penetration Testing according to AVA_VAN The penetration testing approach was based on the developer's vulnerability analysis and based on the independent vulnerability assessment of the evaluator. The evaluator's approach was to systematically search for potential vulnerabilities and for known attacks in public domain sources and the use of actual information from international working groups. Analysis why vulnerabilities are not exploitable in the intended environment of the TOE were performed assuming high attack potential. To support and to verify the analysis specific penetration attacks were performed in the course of this evaluation. During the evaluator's penetration testing the TOE operated as specified. During the tests using high attack potential it has not been possible to succesfully penetrate the TOE and the usage of the certified secure HW could be verified. In the intended environment of use the TOE does not feature any exploitable vulnerabilities in the meaning of the Security Targets [6] and [8] for typical attackers possessing a high attack potential, if all the measures required are taken into consideration. The overall test result is that no deviations were found between the expected and the actual test results. No attack scenario with the attack potential high was successful in the TOE s operational environment as defined in the ST [6] and [8] provided that all measures required by the developer are applied. 8 Evaluated Configuration The TOE was evaluated in the configuration as outlined in table 2. In case of the J3A081 and J3A041 Secure Smart Card Controller Revision 3 the underlying hardware allows for three minor configurations, named MIFARE Emulation = A, B1 and B4. All of these configurations have been evaluated in the hardware evaluation of the P5CD081V1A (see [18]). These configurations need to be specified when ordering the hardware at NXP, where the configuration process is performed during the testing phase. There is no way to switch from one configuration to a different one after the manufacturing process is finished. The difference between these minor configurations is the presence and memory size of the MIFARE emulation. 9 Results of the Evaluation 9.1 CC specific results The Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) [9] was provided by the ITSEF according to the Common Criteria [1], the Methodology [2], the requirements of the Scheme [3] and all interpretations and guidelines of the Scheme (AIS) [4] as relevant for the TOE. The Evaluation Methodology CEM [2] was used for those components up to EAL4 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 4 and guidance specific for the technology of the product [4] (AIS 34). The following guidance specific for the technology was used: 18 / 40
19 BSI-DSZ-CC Certification Report The Application of CC to Integrated Circuits, Application of Attack Potential to Smartcards, Public Version of Security Targets (ST-Lite) including JIL Document and CC Supporting Document and CCRA policies (see [4], AIS 25, AIS 26, AIS 35). For RNG assessment the scheme interpretations AIS 20 was used (see [4]). To support composite evaluations according to AIS 36 the document ETR for composite evaluation [10] was provided and approved. This document provides details of this platform evaluation that have to be considered in the course of a composite evaluation on top. As a result of the evaluation the verdict PASS is confirmed for the following assurance components: All components of the EAL 5 package including the class ASE as defined in the CC (see also part C of this report) The components ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 augmented for this TOE evaluation. As the evaluation work performed for this certification procedure was carried out as a reevaluation based on the certificate BSI-DSZ-CC , re-use of specific evaluation tasks was possible. The focus of this re-evaluation was on the change of the underlying hardware platform from P5Cx080V0B to P5Cx081V1A and on the change of the used cryptographic library (upgrade to Version 2.7). The evaluation has confirmed: for the Functionality: for the Assurance: Common Criteria Part 2 extended Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 For specific evaluation results regarding the development and production environment see annex B in part D of this report. The results of the evaluation are only applicable to the TOE as defined in chapter 2 and the configuration as outlined in chapter 8 above. 9.2 Results of cryptographic assessment The vulnerability assessment results as stated within this certificate do not include a rating for those cryptographic algorithms and their implementation suitable for encryption and decryption (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2). This holds for the TOE Security functionality SF.CryptoOperation. The following cryptographic algorithms are used by the TOE to enforce its security policy: 19 / 40
20 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC Algorithm AES in ECB/CBC Mode EC over GF(p) EC over GF(p) EC with SHA-1, SHA-224, and SHA- 256 Retail MAC RSA (and PKCS#1 padding) RSA with SHA-1 RSA with SHA-1 Bit Length 128 / 224 / to to to 320 Application Portion of the TSF Standard of Implementation data encryption / decryption Diffie-Hellman key agreement Secure point addition digital signature generation and verification 112 secure messaging message authentication code 1976 to to to 2048 data encryption / decryption digital signature generation and verification digital signature generation and verification SHA-1 none secure hash computation SHA-224 none secure hash computation SHA-256 none secure hash computation Triple DES in ECB/CBC Mode Triple- DES in CBC mode Triple- DES in outer CBC Mode 112 / 168 data encryption / decryption 112 secure messaging encryption and decryption 112 / byte MAC generation and verification Standard of Application 8 SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation ISO SF.CryptoOperation ISO SF.CryptoOperation ISO SF.CryptoOperation ISO SF.CryptoOperation PKCS#1 - - SF.CryptoOperation ISO SF.CryptoOperation PKCS#1 - - SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation FIPS SF.CryptoOperation ISO Table 3: TOE cryptographic functionality Validity Period Due to the character of the TOE, which provides platform functionality, no Application Standard is applicable. The Validity Period refers to the Application Standard and is therefore not applicable for this TOE. 20 / 40