BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 for Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor 1.0 from T-Systems International GmbH BSI - Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik, Postfach 20 03 63, D-53133 Bonn Phone +49 (0)228 99 9582-0, Fax +49 (0)228 9582-5477, Infoline +49 (0)228 99 9582-111 Certification Report V1.0 CC-Zert-327 V5.21 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 (*) Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor 1.0 from T-Systems International GmbH PP Conformance: Common Criteria Schutzprofil (Protection Profile) Schutzprofil 1: Anforderungen an den Netzkonnektor (NK-PP), Version 3.2.2, 11.04.2016, BSI-CC-PP- 0047-2015 Functionality: PP conformant Common Criteria Part 2 extended Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 3 augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_TDS.3, ADV_IMP.1, ALC_TAT.1, ALC_FLR.2, AVA_VAN.5 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 Scheme Interpretations and by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 5 for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.1. CC and CEM are also published as ISO/IEC 15408 and ISO/IEC 18045. (*) 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 and Notification. For details on the validity see Certification Report part A chapter 4 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, 10 September 2018 For the Federal Office for Information Security Bernd Kowalski L.S. Head of Division SOGIS Recognition Agreement for components up to EAL 4 Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement recognition for components up to EAL 2 and ALC_FLR only Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik Godesberger Allee 185-189 - D-53175 Bonn - Postfach 20 03 63 - D-53133 Bonn Phone +49 (0)228 99 9582-0 - Fax +49 (0)228 9582-5477 - Infoline +49 (0)228 99 9582-111 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 This page is intentionally left blank. 4 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report Contents A. Certification.......................................................................................................................6 1. Preliminary Remarks.....................................................................................................6 2. Specifications of the Certification Procedure................................................................6 3. Recognition Agreements...............................................................................................7 4. Performance of Evaluation and Certification.................................................................8 5. Validity of the Certification Result..................................................................................8 6. Publication.....................................................................................................................9 B. Certification Results........................................................................................................10 1. Executive Summary.....................................................................................................11 2. Identification of the TOE..............................................................................................12 3. Security Policy.............................................................................................................13 4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope......................................................................13 5. Architectural Information..............................................................................................13 6. Documentation............................................................................................................13 7. IT Product Testing........................................................................................................13 8. Evaluated Configuration..............................................................................................14 9. Results of the Evaluation.............................................................................................15 10. Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE......................................................17 11. Security Target...........................................................................................................18 12. Definitions..................................................................................................................18 13. Bibliography...............................................................................................................20 C. Excerpts from the Criteria...............................................................................................23 D. Annexes..........................................................................................................................24 5 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 A. Certification 1. Preliminary Remarks Under the BSIG1 Act, the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) has the task of issuing certificates for information technology products. Certification of a product is carried out on the instigation of the vendor or a distributor, hereinafter called the sponsor. A part of the procedure is the technical examination (evaluation) of the product according to the security criteria published by the BSI or generally recognised security criteria. The evaluation is normally carried out by an evaluation facility recognised by the BSI or by BSI itself. The result of the certification procedure is the present Certification Report. This report contains among others the certificate (summarised assessment) and the detailed Certification Results. The Certification Results contain the technical description of the security functionality of the certified product, the details of the evaluation (strength and weaknesses) and instructions for the user. 2. Specifications of the Certification Procedure The certification body conducts the procedure according to the criteria laid down in the following: ● Act on the Federal Office for Information Security1 ● BSI Certification and Approval Ordinance2 ● BSI Schedule of Costs3 ● Special decrees issued by the Bundesministerium des Innern (Federal Ministry of the Interior) ● DIN EN ISO/IEC 17065 standard ● BSI certification: Scheme documentation describing the certification process (CC- Produkte) [3] ● BSI certification: Scheme documentation on requirements for the Evaluation Facility, its approval and licencing process (CC-Stellen) [3] ● Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.14 [1] also published as ISO/IEC 15408. 1 Act on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Gesetz - BSIG) of 14 August 2009, Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2821 2 Ordinance on the Procedure for Issuance of Security Certificates and approval by the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Zertifizierungs- und -Anerkennungsverordnung - BSIZertV) of 17 December 2014, Bundesgesetzblatt 2014, part I, no. 61, p. 2231 3 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. 519 6 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report ● Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1 [2] also published as ISO/IEC 18045. ● BSI certification: Application Notes and Interpretation of the Scheme (AIS) [4] 3. 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. 3.1. European Recognition of CC – Certificates (SOGIS-MRA) The SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement (SOGIS-MRA) Version 3 became effective in April 2010. 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 SOGIS Technical Domains only. The basic recognition level includes Common Criteria (CC) Evaluation Assurance Levels EAL 1 to EAL 4. For "Smartcards and similar devices" a SOGIS Technical Domain is in place. For "HW Devices with Security Boxes" a SOGIS Technical Domains is in place, too. In addition, certificates issued for Protection Profiles based on Common Criteria are part of the recognition agreement. The current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes, details on recognition, and the history of the agreement can be seen on the website at https://www.sogisportal.eu. The SOGIS-MRA logo printed on the certificate indicates that it is recognised under the terms of this agreement by the related bodies of the signatory nations. A disclaimer beneath the logo indicates the specific scope of recognition. This certificate is recognized according to the rules of SOGIS-MRA, i.e. up to and including CC part 3 EAL 4 components. The evaluation contained the component AVA_VAN.5 that is not mutually recognised in accordance with the provisions of the SOGIS MRA. For mutual recognition the EAL 4 component of this assurance family is relevant. 3.2. International Recognition of CC – Certificates (CCRA) The international arrangement on the mutual recognition of certificates based on the CC (Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement, CCRA-2014) has been ratified on 08 September 2014. It covers CC certificates based on collaborative Protection Profiles (cPP) (exact use), CC certificates based on assurance components up to and including EAL 2 or the assurance family Flaw Remediation (ALC_FLR) and CC certificates for Protection Profiles and for collaborative Protection Profiles (cPP). The current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes can be seen on the website: http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org. The Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement logo printed on the certificate indicates that this certification is recognised under the terms of this agreement by the related bodies of the signatory nations. A disclaimer beneath the logo indicates the specific scope of recognition. 4 Proclamation of the Bundesministerium des Innern of 12 February 2007 in the Bundesanzeiger dated 23 February 2007, p. 3730 7 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 This certificate is recognized according to the rules of CCRA-2014, i. e. up to and including CC part 3 EAL 2+ ALC_FLR components. 4. 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 Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor, 1.0 has undergone the certification procedure at BSI. The evaluation of the product Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor, 1.0 was conducted by T-Systems International GmbH. The evaluation was completed on 27.07.2018. T-Systems International GmbH is an evaluation facility (ITSEF)5 recognised by the certification body of BSI. For this certification procedure the sponsor and applicant is: T-Systems International GmbH. The product was developed by: T-Systems International GmbH. The certification is concluded with the comparability check and the production of this Certification Report. This work was completed by the BSI. 5. Validity of the Certification Result This Certification Report applies only to the version of the product as indicated. The confirmed assurance package is 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, as specified in the following report and in the Security Target. For the meaning of the assurance components and assurance levels please refer to CC itself. Detailed references are listed in part C of this 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-assessment or 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 order to avoid an indefinite usage of the certificate when evolved attack methods would require a re-assessment of the products resistance to state of the art attack methods, the maximum validity of the certificate has been limited. The certificate issued on 10 September 2018 is valid until 9 September 2023. Validity can be re-newed by re- certification. The owner of the certificate is obliged: 5 Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility 8 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report 1. when advertising the certificate or the fact of the product's certification, to refer to the Certification Report as well as to provide the Certification Report, the Security Target and user guidance documentation mentioned herein to any customer of the product for the application and usage of the certified product, 2. to inform the Certification Body at BSI immediately about vulnerabilities of the product that have been identified by the developer or any third party after issuance of the certificate, 3. to inform the Certification Body at BSI immediately in the case that security relevant changes in the evaluated life cycle, e.g. related to development and production sites or processes, occur, or the confidentiality of documentation and information related to the Target of Evaluation (TOE) or resulting from the evaluation and certification procedure where the certification of the product has assumed this confidentiality being maintained, is not given any longer. In particular, prior to the dissemination of confidential documentation and information related to the TOE or resulting from the evaluation and certification procedure that do not belong to the deliverables according to the Certification Report part B, or for those where no dissemination rules have been agreed on, to third parties, the Certification Body at BSI has to be informed. 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. 6. Publication The product Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor, 1.0 has been included in the BSI list of certified products, which is published regularly (see also Internet: https://www.bsi.bund.de and [5]). Further information can be obtained from BSI-Infoline +49 228 9582-111. Further copies of this Certification Report can be requested from the developer6 of the product. The Certification Report may also be obtained in electronic form at the internet address stated above. 6 T-Systems International GmbH Hahnstraße 43d 60528 Frankfurt am Main 9 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 B. Certification Results The following results represent a summary of ● the Security Target of the sponsor for the Target of Evaluation, ● the relevant evaluation results from the evaluation facility, and ● complementary notes and stipulations of the certification body. 10 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report 1. Executive Summary The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the product “Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor”. The TOE is a software product, implementing the requirements of the Konnektor specification (in particular the Netzkonnektor specification). The Netzkonnektor is part of the overall product “MAP – Medical Access Port – Einboxkonnektor” and is delivered together with a correspondent hardware. The Security Target [6] is the basis for this certification. It is based on the certified Protection Profile Common Criteria Schutzprofil (Protection Profile) Schutzprofil 1: Anforderungen an den Netzkonnektor (NK-PP), Version 3.2.2, 11.04.2016, BSI-CC-PP- 0047-2015 [8]. 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 3 augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_TDS.3, ADV_IMP.1, ALC_TAT.1, ALC_FLR.2, AVA_VAN.5. The TOE Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the TOE are outlined in the Security Target [6], chapter 6. They are selected from Common Criteria Part 2 and some of them are newly defined. Thus the TOE is CC Part 2 extended. The TOE Security Functional Requirements are implemented by the following TOE Security Functionality: TOE Security Functionality Addressed issue SF1 VPN-Client providing secure communication channels SF2 Dynamic packet filter providing user data protection SF3 Network services providing time server, DHCP and DNS resolver functionality SF4 Self-protection SF5 User Authentication for administration and authentication of secure channels SF6 Cryptographic base services as required for the authentication and encryption SF7 Firmware-Update Table 1: TOE Security Functionalities For more details please refer to the Security Target [6], chapter 7. The assets to be protected by the TOE are defined in the Security Target [6], chapter 3.1. Based on these assets the TOE Security Problem is defined in terms of Assumptions, Threats and Organisational Security Policies. This is outlined in the Security Target [6], chapters 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5. This certification covers the configurations of the TOE as outlined in chapter 8. 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 11 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 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: Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor, 1.0 The following table outlines the TOE deliverables: No Type Identifier Release Form of Delivery 1 SW UEFI S1.40.1.0 Installed to the hardware during initial setup 2 SW Linux-Betriebssystem 3.16 Patch 53 Installed to the hardware during initial setup 3 SW Netzkonnektorsoftware 1.4.11, Build 71, Ausprägung Einboxkonnektor Installed to the hardware during initial setup 4 DOC Produkthandbuch T-Systems Konnektor, T-Systems International GmbH 1.12, 18.06.2018 Download from developer website SHA256: d4be8141aed9cec5b0f6fd8adf8bf858b3f 4727bc6d7f5a7a7459deb6c35f4e7 Table 2: Deliverables of the TOE Note that the software is installed on the hardware platform “T-Systems Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor” but the hardware platform was not subject of the evaluation. The TOE consists of the 6 artefacts as listed in chapter 1 of the Security Target [6] which form in conjunction the “Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0, Bauform Einboxkonnektor”. 4 of these artefacts are equal to item 1 to 4 of Table 2: TOE deliverables. The remaining artefacts are the documents ● “Schnittstellenspezifikation T-Systems Netzkonnektor” [11], and ● “Schnittstellenspezifikation RMS-Konnektor” [11]. Note that the document “Schnittstellenspezifikation T-Systems Netzkonnektor” has been updated just before finalization of the ETR. The differences between the versions 1.3 and 1.4 have been examined and the evaluator determines that those changes do not affect any ETR-Parts. Therefore the updated document version is referenced here. Note that the document “Schnittstellenspezifikation RMS-Konnektor” is still mentioned as part of the TOE, although the RMS interface will not be used in the current version of the TOE. Note that only 2 items (the Netzkonnektor hardware platform and one document “Produkthandbuch T-Systems Konnektor” [11]) are delivered since the UEFI, the Linux OS and the Netzkonnektor software are delivered as part of the Netzkonnektor hardware platform during initial setup. The remaining documents are technical interface specifications and only provided on request. The delivery procedures are described in the document “Sicherheitskonzept, Sichere Lieferkette Konnektor” [9]. This document is not 12 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report part of the TOE deliverables. The tasks required by the end user to support the secure delivery are included in the Produkthandbuch T-Systems Konnektor. The hardware platform containing the TOE (software and documentation) is a white plastic housing containing an Intel architecture, which provides the necessary hardware interfaces as needed for the usage of the TOE. Part of this hardware environment is the gSMC-K, which is used by the TOE for handling cryptographic keys and generating random numbers. The TOE can be identified using the management webinterface. It will be shown as “Telekom-Konnektor EBK (TKONEBK) in der Produktversion 1.4.11.71 - Build: 1 - Revision: a2231f6e6a:2.2.4“. 3. Security Policy The Security Policy is expressed by the set of Security Functional Requirements and implemented by the TOE. It covers the following issues: ● Security Audit, ● Cryptographic Support, ● User Data Protection, ● Identification and Authentication, ● Security Management, ● Protection of the TSF, ● Trusted Path/Channels. 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.NK.phys_Schutz: The security measure of the environment must protect the TOE against unauthorized access, ● OE.NK.Admin_EVG: It is assumed that administrators are trustworthy and trained to operates the TOE as required by the guidance. Details can be found in the Security Target [6], chapter 3.5. 5. Architectural Information The architectural description of the TOE including TOE structure and interfaces is provided in section 1.3 of the Security Target [6]. 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. 13 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 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 The independent testing was partially performed using the developer’s testing environment and partially using the test environment of the CLEF. The developer’s testing environment implements the external infrastructure required to operate the TOE with the different setup. Different setups including InReihe Mode and Parallel Mode being intended to be covered by the current evaluation were tested. Independent testing approach: The TOE was independently tested with respect to three subject areas: a) An incoming TLS connection, which the TOE provides for giving an administrator access to the management interface, b) an outgoing IKE/IPsec connection, which the TOE provides for connecting itself to the TI and SIS, and c) the packet filter, which the TOE provides for forward or deny network packets. The TLS and IKE/IPsec tests are strictly based on the RFC conformity requirements. Testing was performed with dedicated test suites focusing on the conformity testing and secure configuration of the TLS client, TLS server and IKE/IPSEC connection. The firewall tests cover the whole TCP and UDP range of the TOE’s LAN and WAN interfaces, so that all firewall rules that are given by the ST are thoroughly tested. TOE test configurations Regarding the TLS server functionality no special configuration is made. The TOE provides a complete configured TLS interface in its default configuration state. Regarding the IKE functionality the TOE is configured to use special X.509 certificates so that it can connect to a VPN server, which is under complete control of the evaluators and that is not the default VPN server. This is done by replacing the default VPN server by the customized VPN server in the test environment. Regarding the firewall tests the TOE is tested in different setup, which affects the configuration state of the TOE’s packet filter. A setup is defined by a set of the following possible settings: TI VPN (up/down), SIS VPN (up/down), internet mode (IAG/SIS/off), inventory networks (on/off), online mode (on/off), connection (serial/parallel). During testing the TOE is triggered by the evaluators to dynamically switch between all possible configuration sets. Independent test subset chosen incl. a short justification The TSFIs tested by independent evaluator tests are (PS1;LS6), (PS3;LS3), (PS3;LS4), (PS2;LS2), (PS3;LS5), (PS1;LS1), (PS4;LS7), and (PS5;LS8). This includes all major interface functionalities like VPN and packet filtering. Because these interfaces are most critical for the security that the TOE provides, the selection of independent evaluator tests has a good coverage of the possible attack paths an attacker can use from outside the TOE. Developer’s test subset repeated incl. a short justification The evaluators repeated developer tests for four important subject areas: a) The factory reset of the TOE, which deletes certain sensitive data, b) test of the secure boot process, which checks the integrity of the TOE at boot time, c) the TOE’s network isolation during 14 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report boot time, and d) the deletion of IPsec keys in the TOE’s RAM after their usage. All those tests cover critical security functionalities of the TOE and are developer-coded implementations. Verdict for the sub-activity The overall test result is that some minor deviations were found between the expected and the actual test results. The further analysis of the evaluator did not reveal any vulnerability or violation of a Security Functional Requirement. 8. Evaluated Configuration This certification covers the following configurations of the TOE: The Netzkonnektor is only available in one evaluated configuration comprising the versions of the software components as detailed in Table 2: TOE deliverables above. 9. Results of the Evaluation 9.1. CC specific results The Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) [7] 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 EAL 5 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 5. For RNG assessment the scheme interpretations AIS 20 was used (see [4]). The assurance refinements outlined in the Security Target were followed in the course of the evaluation of the TOE. As a result of the evaluation the verdict PASS is confirmed for the following assurance components: ● All components of the EAL 3 package including the class ASE as defined in the CC (see also part C of this report) ● The components ADV_FSP.4, ADV_TDS.3, ADV_IMP.1, ALC_TAT.1, ALC_FLR.2, AVA_VAN.5 augmented for this TOE evaluation. The evaluation has confirmed: ● PP Conformance: Common Criteria Schutzprofil (Protection Profile) Schutzprofil 1: Anforderungen an den Netzkonnektor (NK-PP), Version 3.2.2, 11.04.2016, BSI-CC-PP-0047-2015 [8] ● for the Functionality: PP conformant Common Criteria Part 2 extended ● for the Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 3 augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_TDS.3, ADV_IMP.1, ALC_TAT.1, ALC_FLR.2, AVA_VAN.5 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. 15 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 9.2. Results of cryptographic assessment The following table gives an overview of the cryptographic functionalities inside the TOE to enforce the security policy. No. Purpose Cryptographic Mechanism Standard of Implementation Key Size in Bits Comment 1 Authenticity RSA signature verification with encoding RSASSA-PKCS1- 1.5 using SHA-256 [PKCS#1] (RSA), [FIPS180-4] (SHA) 2048 FPT_TDC.1/NK.Zert, FCS_COP.1/NK.Auth, FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 2 Authentication RSA signature creation with support of gSMC-K and verification with encoding RSASSA-PKCS1- 1.5 using SHA-256 [PKCS#1] (RSA), [FIPS180-4] (SHA) 2048 FCS_COP.1/NK.Auth, FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 3 Key Agreement Diffie-Hellman (IKEv2) with key derivation function PRF-HMAC-SHA- {1, 256, 384, 512} [HaC] (DH), [RFC3526] (DH-group), [FIPS180-4] (SHA), [RFC2104] (HMAC), [RFC5996] (IKEv2) 2048 (dh- group 14) with DH exponent length ≥ 384 bits FCS_CKM.2/NK.IKE 4 Diffie-Hellman with TLS key derivation function [HaC] (DH) [RFC3526] (DH-group), [FIPS180-4] (SHA), [RFC1321] (MD5), [RFC2104] (HMAC), [RFC4346] (TLSv1.1) [RFC5246] (TLSv1.2) 2048 (dh- group 14) with DH exponent length ≥ 384 bits FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 5 EC Diffie-Hellman with TLS key derivation function [RFC4492] (ECC for TLS), [RFC4346] (TLSv1.1), [RFC5246] (TLSv1.2) Key sizes correspond ing to the used elliptic curves P- {256, 384} [FIPS 186- 4], brainpoolP {256, 384}r1 ([RFC5639 ], [RFC7027] ) FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 6 Confidentiality AES in CBC mode [FIPS197] (AES), [RFC3602] (AES-CBC) 256 FCS_COP.1/NK.ESP, FCS_COP.1/NK.IPsec, FCS_CKM.2/NK.IKE 7 AES in CBC mode [FIPS197] (AES), [RFC3602] (AES-CBC) 128, 256 FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 16 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report No. Purpose Cryptographic Mechanism Standard of Implementation Key Size in Bits Comment 8 Integrity HMAC with SHA- {1, 256, 384} (IKE, IPsec) [FIPS180-4] (SHA), [RFC2104] (HMAC), [RFC2404], [RFC4868], [RFC5996] (IKEv2) 160, 256, 384 FCS_COP.1/NK.HMAC 9 HMAC with SHA- {1, 256, 384} (TLS) [FIPS180-4] (SHA), [RFC2104] (HMAC), [RFC4346] (TLSv1.1), [RFC5246] (TLSv1.2) 160, 256, 384 FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 10 Authenticated Encryption AES in GCM mode (TLS) [FIPS180-4] (SHA), [SP 800-38D] (GCM), [RFC5288] (GCM for TLS), [RFC5116] (AEAD), [RFC5246] (TLSv1.2) 128, 256 FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin 11 Trusted Channel IKEv2, IPsec [RFC5996] (IKEv2) [RFC4301] (IPsec), [RFC4303] (ESP), [14] FTP_ITC.1/NK.VPN_TI, FTP_ITC.1/NK.VPN_SIS 12 TLS v1.1 and v1.2 [RFC4346] (TLSv1.1), [RFC5246] (TLSv1.2), [15] FTP_TRP.1/NK.Admin Table 3: TOE cryptographic functionality The strength of the cryptographic algorithms was not rated in the course of this certification procedure (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2). According to [gemSpec_Kon], [gemSpec_Krypt] and [TR03116-1] the algorithms are suitable for the corresponding purpose. The strength of the cryptographic algorithms was not rated in the course of this certification procedure (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2). But Cryptographic Functionalities with a security level of lower than 100 bits can no longer be regarded as secure without considering the application context. Therefore, for these functionalities it shall be checked whether the related crypto operations are appropriate for the intended system. Some further hints and guidelines can be derived from the 'Technische Richtlinie BSI TR-02102' (https://www.bsi.bund.de). Any Cryptographic Functionality that is marked in column 'Security Level above 100 Bits' of the following table with 'no' achieves a security level of lower than 100 Bits (in general context). No. Purpose Cryptographic Mechanism Standard of Implementation Key Size in Bits Security Level above 100 Bits Comment 1 Authenticity RSA signature verification with encoding RSASSA- PKCS1-1.5 using SHA-256 [PKCS#1] (RSA), [FIPS180-4] (SHA) 4096 yes Firmware update signatures verification FDP_ITC.1/NK.FWU pdate Table 4: TOE cryptographic functionality (Update) 17 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 10. Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE The documents as outlined in table 2 contain necessary information about the usage of the TOE and all security hints therein have to be considered. In addition all aspects of Assumptions, Threats and OSPs as outlined in the Security Target not covered by the TOE itself need to be fulfilled by the operational environment of the TOE. The customer or user of the product shall consider the results of the certification within his system risk management process. In order for the evolution of attack methods and techniques to be covered, he should define the period of time until a re-assessment of the TOE is required and thus requested from the sponsor of the certificate. The limited validity for the usage of cryptographic algorithms as outlined in chapter 9 has to be considered by the user and his system risk management process, too. If available, certified updates of the TOE should be used. If non-certified updates or patches are available the user of the TOE should request the sponsor to provide a re- certification. In the meantime a risk management process of the system using the TOE should investigate and decide on the usage of not yet certified updates and patches or take additional measures in order to maintain system security. According to a calculation of the logfile database the capacity is considered as sufficient for a runtime of 6 months. That ensures that a log entry of a fatal error will not be overwritten in a period of 6 months. 11. Security Target For the purpose of publishing, the Security Target [6] of the Target of Evaluation (TOE) is provided within a separate document as Annex A of this report. 12. Definitions 12.1. Acronyms AIS Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme BSI Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik / Federal Office for Information Security, Bonn, Germany BSIG BSI-Gesetz / Act on the Federal Office for Information Security CCRA Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement CC Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation CEM Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation CLEF Commercial Licensed Evaluation Facility cPP Collaborative Protection Profile EAL Evaluation Assurance Level ETR Evaluation Technical Report IKE Internet Key Exchange IAG Internet Access Gateway IPsec Internet Protocol Security 18 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report IT Information Technology ITSEF Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility LAN Local Area netzwork PP Protection Profile RNG Random Number Generator SAR Security Assurance Requirement SFP Security Function Policy SFR Security Functional Requirement SIS Secure Internet Service ST Security Target SW Software TCP/IP Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol TI Telematikinfrastruktur TLS Tranport Layer Security TOE Target of Evaluation TSF TOE Security Functionality UDP User Datagram Protocol WAN Wide Area Network 12.2. Glossary Augmentation - The addition of one or more requirement(s) to a package. Collaborative Protection Profile - A Protection Profile collaboratively developed by an International Technical Community endorsed by the Management Committee. Extension - The addition to an ST or PP of functional requirements not contained in CC part 2 and/or assurance requirements not contained in CC part 3. Formal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics based on well- established mathematical concepts. Informal - Expressed in natural language. Object - A passive entity in the TOE, that contains or receives information, and upon which subjects perform operations. Package - named set of either security functional or security assurance requirements Protection Profile - A formal document defined in CC, expressing an implementation independent set of security requirements for a category of IT Products that meet specific consumer needs. Security Target - An implementation-dependent statement of security needs for a specific identified TOE. Semiformal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics. Subject - An active entity in the TOE that performs operations on objects. 19 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Target of Evaluation - An IT Product and its associated administrator and user guidance documentation that is the subject of an Evaluation. TOE Security Functionality - Combined functionality of all hardware, software, and firmware of a TOE that must be relied upon for the correct enforcement of the SFRs. 13. Bibliography [1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1, Part 1: Introduction and general model, Revision 4, September 2012 Part 2: Security functional components, Revision 4, September 2012 Part 3: Security assurance components, Revision 4, September 2012 http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org [2] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CEM), Evaluation Methodology, Version 3.1, Revision 4, September 2012 http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org [3] BSI certification: Scheme documentation describing the certification process (CC- Produkte) and Scheme documentation on requirements for the Evaluation Facility, approval and licencing (CC-Stellen), https://www.bsi.bund.de/zertifizierung [4] Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme (AIS) as relevant for the TOE7 https://www.bsi.bund.de/AIS [5] German IT Security Certificates (BSI 7148), periodically updated list published also on the BSI Website, https://www.bsi.bund.de/zertifizierungsreporte [6] Security Target BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018, Version 2.3, July 13, 2018, Sicherheitsvorgaben für den Medical Access Port_1BK_1.0.0 Netzkonnektor Bauform Einboxkonnektor, T-Systems International GmbH [7] Evaluation Technical Report, Version 1.3, July 27, 2018, T-Systems International GmbH (confidential document) [8] Common Criteria Schutzprofil (Protection Profile) Schutzprofil 1: Anforderungen an den Netzkonnektor (NK-PP), Version 3.2.2, 11.04.2016, BSI-CC-PP-0047-2015 [9] Sicherheitskonzept, Sichere Lieferkette Konnektor, T-Systems International GmbH, Version 1.0.1, 05.04.2018 [10] Configuration lists for the TOE (confidential documents) patched_source_config_list_sha256_Rev_3bddaa659.txt patched_source_config_list_sha1_Rev_3bddaa659.txt binary_config_list_sha1_Rev_83406e637.txt extern_config_list_sha1_CNN-1.4.11.71.1_Rev_55cc728f_filtered.txt konnektor-crypto_config_list_sha256_Rev_81a0025_filtered.txt ptxdist_2016.06.1_config_list_sha1_Rev_f17be9a7_filtered.txt konnektor-doc_config_list_sha256_Rev_0c79538_filtered.txt device_config_list_sha1_CNN-1.4.11.71.1_Rev_a2231f6e6a_filtered.txt 7 specifically • AIS 20, Version 3, Funktionalitätsklassen und Evaluationsmethodologie für deterministische Zufallszahlengeneratoren • AIS 35, Version 2, Öffentliche Fassung des Security Targets (ST-Lite) including JIL Document and CC Supporting Document and CCRA policies 20 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report binary_config_list_sha256_Rev_83406e637.txt device_config_list_sha256_CNN-1.4.11.71.1_Rev_a2231f6e6a_filtered.txt ptxdist_2016.06.1_config_list_sha256_Rev_f17be9a7_filtered.txt konnektor-test_config_list_sha256_Rev_1e079c7_filtered.txt konnektor-site_config_list_sha256_Rev_f7c1e1f_filtered.txt extern_config_list_sha256_CNN-1.4.11.71.1_Rev_55cc728f_filtered.txt [11] Guidance documentation for the TOE: Produkthandbuch T-Systems Konnektor, T-Systems International GmbH, Version 1.12, June 18, 2018 Schnittstellenspezifikation T-Systems Netzkonnektor Firmware-Version 1.4.11, Dokumentationsstand 1.4, T-Systems International GmbH, July 11, 2018 T-Systems, Schnittstellenspezifikation RMS-Konnektor, Gematik-RMS, Version 1.1, March 14, 2018 [12] Implementation standards: [HaC] A. Menezes, P. van Oorschot und O. Vanstone. Handbook of Applied Cryptography. CRCPress, 1996. [FIPS180-4] FIPS PUB 180-4 Secure Hash Signature Standard (SHS), NIST, March 2012 [FIPS186-4] FIPS PUB 186-4 Digital Signature Standard (DSS), NIST, July 2013 [FIPS197] Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 197: ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD (AES), NIST, November 2001 [PKCS#1] B. Kaliski: PKCS #1: RSA Encryption, Version 2.1, RFC 3447, Version 2.2, October 2012 [RFC1321] Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm ", April 1992. [RFC2104] Krawczyk, H., Bellare, M., and R. Canetti, „HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication", February 1997 [RFC2404] The Use of HMAC-SHA-1-96 within ESP and AH, Network Working Group, November 1998 [RFC3268] Chown, P., Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Cipher suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS), June 2002 [RFC3526] More Modular Exponential (MODP) Diffie-Hellman groups for Internet Key Exchange (IKE), May 2003 [RFC3602] S .Frankel, R. Glenn, S. Kelly: The AES-CBC Cipher Algorithm and Its Use with IPsec. September 2003 [RFC4301] Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol (IPsec), S. Kent, K. Seo, December 2005 [RFC4303] IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP), RFC 4303 (ESP), S. Kent, December 2005 [RFC4346] The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.1, T. Dierks, E. Rescorla, April 2006 21 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 [RFC4492] Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) Cipher Suites for Transport Layer Security (TLS), S. Blake-Wilson, N. Bolyard, V. Gupta, C. Hawk, B. Moeller, May 2006 [RFC4868] Using HMAC-SHA-256, HMAC-SHA-384, and HMAC-SHA-512 with IPsec, S. Kelly, S. Frankel, May 2007 [RFC5116] An Interface and Algorithms for Authenticated Encryption, D. McGrew, January 2008 [RFC5246] The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2, RFC 5246, Network Working Group [RFC5639] Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) Brainpool Standard Curves and Curve Generation, M. Lochter, J. Merkle, March 2010 [RFC5996] The Internet Key Exchange Protocol Version 2 (IKEv2), D. Harkins, D. Carrel, September 2010 [RFC7027] Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC) Brainpool Curves for Transport Layer Security (TLS), J. Merkle, M. Lochter, October 2013 [SP800-38A] Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation – Methods and Techniques, December 2001 [SP800-38B] Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: The CMAC Mode for Authentication, May 2005 [SP800-38D] Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation: Galois/Counter Mode (GCM) and GMAC, November 2007 [SP800-90A] Recommendation for Random Number Generation Using Deterministic Random Bit Generators, NIST Special Publication 800-90A, Revision 1, June 2015. [13] Application standards: [gemSpec_Kon] Einführung der Gesundheitskarte: Spezifikation Konnektor, gematik Gesellschaft für Telematikanwendungen der Gesundheitskarte mbH, Version 4.11.1, 27.04.2017 [gemSpec_Krypt] Einführung der Gesundheitskarte - Verwendung kryptographischer Algorithmen in der Telematikinfrastruktur, gematik Gesellschaft für Telematikanwendungen der Gesundheitskarte mbH, Version 2.9.0, 19.12.2017 [TR03116-1] Technische Richtlinie BSI TR-03116-1, Kryptographische Vorgaben für die eCard-Projekte für der Bundesregierung, Teil 1: Telematikinfrastruktur, Technische Arbeitsgruppe TR-03116, Version 3.19, 03.12.2015 [14] RFC Conformity Report IKE, Evaluation Facility T-Systems International GmbH, Version 1.0 (confidential document) [15] RFC Conformity Report TLS, Evaluation Facility T-Systems International GmbH, Version 1.3, 18.07.2018 (confidential document) 22 / 24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 Certification Report C. Excerpts from the Criteria For the meaning of the assurance components and levels the following references to the Common Criteria can be followed: • On conformance claim definitions and descriptions refer to CC part 1 chapter 10.4 • On the concept of assurance classes, families and components refer to CC Part 3 chapter 7.1 • On the concept and definition of pre-defined assurance packages (EAL) refer to CC Part 3 chapters 7.2 and 8 • On the assurance class ASE for Security Target evaluation refer to CC Part 3 chapter 11 • On the detailled definitions of the assurance components for the TOE evaluation refer to CC Part 3 chapters 12 to 16 • The table in CC part 3 , Annex E summarizes the relationship between the evaluation assurance levels (EAL) and the assurance classes, families and components. The CC are published at http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/cc/ 23 / 24 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0928-2018 D. Annexes List of annexes of this certification report Annex A: Security Target provided within a separate document. Note: End of report 24 / 24