UNCLASSIFIED
COMMON CRITERIA CERTIFICATION REPORT
Illumio Adaptive Security Platform v18.2.2
Illumio
12 July 2019
383-4-459
V1.0
UNCLASSIFIED
FOREWORD
This certification report is an UNCLASSIFIED publication, issued under the authority of the Chief, Communications Security
Establishment (CSE).
The Information Technology (IT) product identified in this certification report, and its associated certificate, has been
evaluated at an approved evaluation facility established under the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (CCCS). This
certification report, and its associated certificate, applies only to the identified version and release of the product in its
evaluated configuration. The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Canadian CC Scheme,
and the conclusions of the evaluation facility in the evaluation report are consistent with the evidence adduced. This report,
and its associated certificate, are not an endorsement of the IT product by Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, or any other
organization that recognizes or gives effect to this report, and its associated certificate, and no warranty for the IT product
by the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, or any other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this report, and its
associated certificate, is either expressed or implied.
If your department has identified a requirement for this certification report based on business needs and would like more
detailed information, please contact:
Contact Centre and Information Services
Edward Drake Building
contact@cyber.gc.ca | 1-833-CYBER-88 (1-833-292-3788)
UNCLASSIFIED
OVERVIEW
The Canadian Common Criteria Scheme provides a third-party evaluation service for determining the trustworthiness of
Information Technology (IT) security products. Evaluations are performed by a commercial Common Criteria Evaluation
Facility (CCEF) under the oversight of the Certification Body, which is managed by the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security.
A CCEF is a commercial facility that has been approved by the Certification Body to perform Common Criteria evaluations; a
significant requirement for such approval is accreditation to the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025, the General Requirements
for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories.
By awarding a Common Criteria certificate, the Certification Body asserts that the product complies with the security
requirements specified in the associated security target. A security target is a requirements specification document that
defines the scope of the evaluation activities. The consumer of certified IT products should review the security target, in
addition to this certification report, in order to gain an understanding of any assumptions made during the evaluation, the IT
product's intended environment, the evaluated security functionality, and the testing and analysis conducted by the CCEF.
The certification report, certificate of product evaluation and security target are listed on the Certified Products list (CPL) for
the Canadian CC Scheme and posted on the Common Criteria portal (the official website of the International Common
Criteria Project).
UNCLASSIFIED
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................... 6
1 Identification of Target of Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Common Criteria Conformance.......................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 TOE Description................................................................................................................................................. 7
1.3 TOE Architecture ............................................................................................................................................... 7
2 Security Policy......................................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Cryptographic Functionality ............................................................................................................................... 8
3 Assumptions and Clarification of Scope ....................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Usage and Environmental Assumptions.............................................................................................................. 9
4 Evaluated Configuration............................................................................................................................10
4.1 Documentation.................................................................................................................................................10
5 Evaluation Analysis Activities....................................................................................................................11
5.1 Development....................................................................................................................................................11
5.2 Guidance Documents........................................................................................................................................11
5.3 Life-Cycle Support ............................................................................................................................................11
6 Testing Activities ....................................................................................................................................12
6.1 Assessment of Developer tests.........................................................................................................................12
6.2 Conduct of Testing...........................................................................................................................................12
6.3 Independent Functional Testing ........................................................................................................................12
6.3.1 Functional Test Results.................................................................................................................................12
6.4 Independent Penetration Testing.......................................................................................................................13
6.4.1 Penetration Test results................................................................................................................................13
7 Results of the Evaluation ..........................................................................................................................14
7.1 Recommendations/Comments..........................................................................................................................14
8 Supporting Content..................................................................................................................................15
8.1 List of Abbreviations.........................................................................................................................................15
8.2 References.......................................................................................................................................................15
UNCLASSIFIED
LIST OF FIGURES
TOE Architecture..................................................................................................................................................7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: TOE Identification ................................................................................................................................................7
Table 2: Cryptographic Implementation(s).........................................................................................................................8
UNCLASSIFIED
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Illumio Adaptive Security Platform v18.2.2 (hereafter referred to as the Target of Evaluation, or TOE), from Illumio , was
the subject of this Common Criteria evaluation. A description of the TOE can be found in Section 1.2. The results of this
evaluation demonstrate that TOE meets the requirements of the conformance claim listed in Table 1 for the evaluated
security functionality.
CygnaCom Solutions is the CCEF that conducted the evaluation. This evaluation was completed 12 July 2019 and was
carried out in accordance with the rules of the Canadian Common Criteria Scheme.
The scope of the evaluation is defined by the security target, which identifies assumptions made during the evaluation, the
intended environment for TOE, and the security functional/assurance requirements. Consumers are advised to verify that
their operating environment is consistent with that specified in the security target, and to give due consideration to the
comments, observations and recommendations in this certification report.
The Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, as the Certification Body, declares that the TOE evaluation meets all the conditions
of the Arrangement on the Recognition of Common Criteria Certificates and that the product is listed on the Certified
Products list (CPL) for the Canadian CC Scheme and the Common Criteria portal (the official website of the International
Common Criteria Project).
UNCLASSIFIED
7
1 IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET OF EVALUATION
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is identified as follows:
Table 1: TOE Identification
TOE Name and Version Illumio Adaptive Security Platform v18.2.2
Developer Illumio
1.1 COMMON CRITERIA CONFORMANCE
The evaluation was conducted using the Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1
Revision 4, for conformance to the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4.
The TOE is claims the following conformance;
Standard Protection Profile for Enterprise Security Management Policy Management, Version 2.1, October 24, 2013
1.2 TOE DESCRIPTION
The TOE consists of the Policy Compute Engine and the Virtual Enforcement Node. Together, these components form a
distributed software platform that is designed to continuously protect communications within and, across, tiers of
applications and hosts. The TOE enables administrators to create access control policies to secure and to implement
granular segmentation of hosts and applications within the enterprise network.
1.3 TOE ARCHITECTURE
TOE Architecture
UNCLASSIFIED
8
2 SECURITY POLICY
The TOE implements policies pertaining to the following security functional classes:
 Enterprise Security Management
 Cryptographic Support
 Security Audit
 Identification and Authentication
 Security Management
 TOE Access
 Protection of the TSF
 Trusted Path/Channels
Complete details of the security functional requirements (SFRs) can be found in the Security Target (ST) referenced in
section 8.2.
2.1 CRYPTOGRAPHIC FUNCTIONALITY
The following cryptographic implementations have been evaluated by the CMVP and are used by the TOE:
Table 2: Cryptographic Implementation(s)
Cryptographic Module Certificate Number
Red Hat Enterprise Linux OpenSSL Cryptographic Module 3016
Windows Server 2016 Cryptographic Primitives Library 2937
Windows Server 2012 R2 Cryptographic Primitives Library 2357
UNCLASSIFIED
9
3 ASSUMPTIONS AND CLARIFICATION OF SCOPE
Consumers of the TOE should consider assumptions about usage and environmental settings as requirements for the
product’s installation and its operating environment. This will ensure the proper and secure operation of the TOE.
3.1 USAGE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions are made regarding the use and deployment of the TOE:
 The TOE will use cryptographic primitives provided by the Operational Environment to perform cryptographic
services.
 The TOE will be able to establish connectivity to other ESM products in order to share security data.
 The Operational Environment will provide mechanisms to the TOE that reduce the ability for an attacker to
impersonate a legitimate user during authentication.
 The TOE will receive reliable time data from the Operational Environment.
 The TOE will receive identity data from the Operational Environment.
 There will be one or more competent individuals assigned to install, configure, and operate the TOE.
UNCLASSIFIED
10
4 EVALUATED CONFIGURATION
The evaluated configuration for the TOE comprises:
 Policy Compute Engine v18.2.2-13462 running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.4 installed on Intel Core i7 with AES‐NI,
Intel Core i5 with AES‐NI and Intel Xeon E5 with AES‐NI.
 Virtual Enforcement Node v18.2.2-4339 running on Windows Server 2016 installed on Intel Xeon E5 with AES-NI and
running on Windows Server 2012 installed on Intel Xeon E5 with AES-NI.
The TOE requires the following components in the operational environment:
 Audit Server
 Authentication Server
 DNS Server
 NTP Server
4.1 DOCUMENTATION
The following documents are provided to the consumer to assist in the configuration and installation of the TOE:
a) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform 18.2.2 PCE Operations Guide 03/20/2019
b) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform 18.2.2 PCE Deployment Guide 03/20/2019
c) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform 18.2.2 PCE Web Console User Guide Version 18.2.2
d) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform 18.2.2 VEN Operations Guide 03/20/2019
e) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform 18.2.2 VEN Deployment Guide 03/20/2019
f) Illumio Adaptive Security Platform (ASP) Common Criteria Administrator Guide, Document Version 0.8, 03/06/2019
UNCLASSIFIED
11
5 EVALUATION ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES
The evaluation analysis activities involved a structured evaluation of the TOE. Documentation and process dealing with
Development, Guidance Documents, and Life-Cycle Support were evaluated.
5.1 DEVELOPMENT
The evaluators analyzed the documentation provided by the vendor; they determined that the design completely and
accurately describes the TOE security functionality (TSF) interfaces and how the TSF implements the security functional
requirements (SFRs). The evaluators determined that the initialization process is secure, that the security functions are
protected against tamper and bypass, and that security domains are maintained.
5.2 GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
The evaluators examined the TOE preparative user guidance and operational user guidance and determined that it
sufficiently and unambiguously describes how to securely transform the TOE into its evaluated configuration and how to use
and administer the product. The evaluators examined and tested the preparative and operational guidance, and determined
that they are complete and sufficiently detailed to result in a secure configuration.
Section 4.1 provides details on the guidance documents.
5.3 LIFE-CYCLE SUPPORT
An analysis of the TOE configuration management system and associated documentation was performed. The evaluators
found that the TOE configuration items were clearly marked.
The evaluators examined the delivery documentation and determined that it described all of the procedures required to
maintain the integrity of the TOE during distribution to the consumer.
UNCLASSIFIED
12
6 TESTING ACTIVITIES
Testing consists of the following three steps: assessing developer tests, performing independent functional tests, and
performing penetration tests.
6.1 ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPER TESTS
The evaluators verified that the developer has met their testing responsibilities by examining their test evidence, and
reviewing their test results, as documented in the ETR. The correspondence between the tests identified in the developer’s
test documentation and the functional specification was complete.
6.2 CONDUCT OF TESTING
The TOE was subjected to a comprehensive suite of formally documented, independent functional and penetration tests. The
detailed testing activities, including configurations, procedures, test cases, expected results and observed results are
documented in a separate Test Results document.
6.3 INDEPENDENT FUNCTIONAL TESTING
During this evaluation, the evaluator developed independent functional tests by examining design and guidance
documentation.
All testing was planned and documented to a sufficient level of detail to allow repeatability of the testing procedures and
results. The following testing activities were performed:
a. PP Assurance Activities: The evaluator performed the assurance activities listed in the claimed PP; and
b. Verification of Cryptographic Modules: The evaluator confirmed that the claimed cryptographic modules are present
in the operational environment.
6.3.1 FUNCTIONAL TEST RESULTS
The developer’s tests and the independent functional tests yielded the expected results, providing assurance that the TOE
behaves as specified in its ST and functional specification.
UNCLASSIFIED
13
6.4 INDEPENDENT PENETRATION TESTING
Subsequent to the independent review of public domain vulnerability databases and all evaluation deliverables, limited
independent evaluator penetration testing was conducted. The penetration tests focused on:
a) Use of automated vulnerability scanning tools to discover potential network, platform and application layer
vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed, Shellshock, FREAK, POODLE, and GHOST;
b) SQL Injection Attacks: The purpose of this test is to observe how the Policy Compute Engine handles attempted SQL
attacks via changes to the URL; and
c) Session Cookie Inspection: The purpose of this test case is to observe how the Policy Compute Engine handles
attempts to hijack web session cookies.
6.4.1 PENETRATION TEST RESULTS
The independent penetration testing did not uncover any exploitable vulnerabilities in the intended operating environment.
UNCLASSIFIED
14
7 RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION
This evaluation has provided the basis for the conformance claim documented in Table 1. The overall verdict for this
evaluation is PASS. These results are supported by evidence in the ETR.
The Information Technology (IT) product identified in this certification report, and its associated certificate, has been
evaluated at an approved evaluation facility established under the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security (CCCS). This
certification report, and its associated certificate, apply only to the specific version and release of the product in its
evaluated configuration.
The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Canadian Common Criteria Scheme and the
conclusions of the evaluation facility in the evaluation report are consistent with the evidence adduced. This is not an
endorsement of the IT product by CCCS or by any other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this certificate, and no
warranty of the IT product by CCCS or by any other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this certificate, is
expressed or implied.
7.1 RECOMMENDATIONS/COMMENTS
It is recommended that all guidance outlined in Section 4.1 be followed to configure the TOE in the evaluated configuration.
UNCLASSIFIED
15
8 SUPPORTING CONTENT
8.1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Term Definition
CCEF Common Criteria Evaluation Facility
CM Configuration Management
CMVP Cryptographic Module Validation Program
CSE Communications Security Establishment
CCCS Canadian Centre for Cyber Security
EAL Evaluation Assurance Level
ESM Enterprise Security Management
ETR Evaluation Technical Report
GC Government of Canada
IT Information Technology
ITS Information Technology Security
PP Protection Profile
SFR Security Functional Requirement
ST Security Target
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSF TOE Security Function
8.2 REFERENCES
Reference
Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4, September 2012.
Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation, CEM, Version 3.1 Revision 4, September
2012.
Illumio Adaptive Security Platform Security Target, Version 1.3, July 9, 2019.
Illumio Adaptive Security Platform Evaluation Technical Report, Version 1.0, July 12, 2019.
Illumio Adaptive Security Platform Assurance Activity Report, Version 1.6, July 12, 2019.