BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 for NXP Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 from NXP Semiconductors Germany 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 ZS-01-01-F-326 V4.24 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Smart Card Controller NXP Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 from NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH PP Conformance: Schutzprofil Smartcard IC Platform Protection Profile, 1.0, BSI-CC-PP-0002-2001 Functionality: BSI-CC-PP-0002_2001 conformant plus product specific extensions Common Criteria Part 2 extended Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, AVA_MSU.3, AVA_VLA.4 Common Criteria Arrangement for components up to EAL 4 The IT product identified in this certificate has been evaluated at an accredited and licensed / approved evaluation facility using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation, Version 2.3 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 2.3 (ISO/IEC 15408:2005). 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, 13 June 2008 For the Federal Office for Information Security Bernd Kowalski L.S. Head of Department 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-0417-2008 This page is intentionally left blank. 4 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report 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. 1 Act setting up the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Errichtungsgesetz, BSIG) of 17 December 1990, Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2834 5 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Contents A Certification........................................................................................................................7 1 Specifications of the Certification Procedure.................................................................7 2 Recognition Agreements................................................................................................7 2.1 European Recognition of ITSEC/CC - Certificates..................................................7 2.2 International Recognition of CC - Certificates.........................................................8 3 Performance of Evaluation and Certification..................................................................8 4 Validity of the certification result.....................................................................................9 5 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.......................................................................14 5 Architectural Information..............................................................................................14 6 Documentation.............................................................................................................14 7 IT Product Testing........................................................................................................15 7.1 Hardware platform testing......................................................................................15 7.2 Crypto Library testing.............................................................................................15 8 Evaluated Configuration...............................................................................................16 9 Results of the Evaluation..............................................................................................16 9.1 CC specific results.................................................................................................16 9.2 Results of cryptographic assessment....................................................................17 10 Obligations and notes for the usage of the TOE........................................................18 11 Security Target...........................................................................................................19 12 Definitions...................................................................................................................19 12.1 Acronyms.............................................................................................................19 12.2 Glossary...............................................................................................................20 13 Bibliography................................................................................................................21 C Excerpts from the Criteria................................................................................................23 D Annexes...........................................................................................................................32 6 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 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: • BSIG2 • BSI Certification Ordinance3 • BSI Schedule of Costs4 • Special decrees issued by the Bundesministerium des Innern (Federal Ministry of the Interior) • DIN EN 45011 standard • BSI certification: Procedural Description (BSI 7125) [1] • Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 2.3 (ISO/IEC 15408:2005)5 • Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation, Version 2.3 • BSI certification: Application Notes and Interpretation of the Scheme (AIS) • Advice from the Certification Body on methodology for assurance components above EAL4 (AIS 34) 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 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. This agreement was signed by the national bodies of Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. This agreement on the mutual recognition of IT security certificates was extended to include certificates based on the CC for all Evaluation Assurance Levels (EAL 1 – EAL 7). The German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) recognises 2 Act setting up the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Errichtungsgesetz, BSIG) of 17 December 1990, Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2834 3 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. 1230 4 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 5 Proclamation of the Bundesministerium des Innern of 10 May 2006 in the Bundesanzeiger dated 19 May 2006, p. 3730 7 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 certificates issued by the national certification bodies of France and the United Kingdom within the terms of this agreement. The SOGIS-MRA logo printed on the certificate indicates that it is recognised under the terms of this agreement. 2.2 International Recognition of CC - Certificates 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 February 2007 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, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States of America. The current list of signatory nations resp. approved certification schemes can be seen on the web site: 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. This evaluation contains the components ACM_SCP.3, ADV_FSP.3, ADV_HLD.3, ADV_IMP.2, ADV_INT.1, ADV_RCR.2, ADV_SPM.3, ALC_LCD.2, ALC_TAT.2, ALC_DVS.2, ATE_DPT.2, AVA_CCA.1, AVA_MSU.3, AVA_VLA.4 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 Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 has undergone the certification procedure at BSI. The evaluation of the product NXP Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 was conducted by Brightsight BV. The evaluation was completed on 17 June 2008. The Brightsight BV is an evaluation facility (ITSEF)6 recognised by the certification body of BSI. For this certification procedure the applicant is: NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH The product was developed by: 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. 6 Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility 8 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report 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 and the confirmed strength of functions, 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 may evolve over time, the resistance of the certified version of the product against new attack methods can be re-assessed if required and the sponsor applies for the certified product being monitored within the assurance continuity program of the BSI Certification Scheme. It is recommended to perform a re-assessment on a regular 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 Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 has been included in the BSI list of the certified products, which is published regularly (see also Internet: http:// www.bsi.bund.de) and [2]. Further information can be obtained from BSI-Infoline +49 228 9582-111. Further copies of this Certification Report can be requested from the developer7 of the product. The Certification Report may also be obtained in electronic form at the internet address stated above. 7 NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH P.O. Box 54 02 40 22502 Hamburg Germany 9 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 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 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report 1 Executive Summary The Target of Evaluation (TOE), consisting of the hardware „NXP SmartMX P5CD080V0B Secure Smart Card Controller“ and the Software „Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B“ provides a set of cryptographic functions that can be used by the Smartcard Embedded Software. The Security Target [3] is the basis for this certification. It is based on the certified Protection Profile Schutzprofil Smartcard IC Platform Protection Profile, 1.0, BSI-CC- PP-0002-2001 [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 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, AVA_MSU.3 and AVA_VLA.4. The TOE Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the TOE are outlined in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 5.1. They are all selected from Common Criteria Part 2. Thus the TOE is CC part 2 conformant. The Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the IT-Environment of the TOE are outlined in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 5.2. The TOE Security Functional Requirements are implemented by the following TOE Security Functions: TOE Security Function Addressed issue F.LOG Extended Logical Protection F.AES AES encryption and decryption F.DES DES encryption and decryption F.RSA_encrypt RSA encryption F.RSA_sign RSA signature generation and verification F.RSA_public computation of an RSA public key F.ECC_GF_p_ECDSA ECC Signature Generation and Verification F.ECC_GF_p_DH_KeyExch Diffie-Hellman Key Exchange F.SHA compute Secure Hash Algorithms F.RSA_KeyGen generate RSA key pairs F.ECC_GF_p_KeyGen ECC Key Generation F.RNG_Access software RNG F.Object_Reuse clearing memory areas F.COPY copy memory contents Table 1: TOE Security Funktions For more details please refer to the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 6.1. The claimed TOE’s Strength of Functions 'high' (SOF-high) for specific functions as indicated in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 1.3 is confirmed. The rating of the Strength of Functions does not include the cryptoalgorithms suitable for encryption and decryption (see BSIG Section 4, Para. 3, Clause 2). For details see chapter 9 of this report. 11 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 The assets to be protected by the TOE are defined in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 3.1. Based on these assets the security environment is defined in terms of Assumptions, Threats and organisational Security Policies. This is outlined in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4. This certification covers the following configurations of the TOE: ● The hardware „NXP SmartMX P5CD080V0B Secure Smart Card Controller“, which is used as evaluated platform, and its Configurations (see [5], [11], [26] for details): P5CD080V0B, P5CN080V0B, P5CC080V0B and P5CC073V0B. ● The „Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B“ Release 2.0, which is built upon this platform. 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 Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 The following table outlines the TOE deliverables: No Type Identifier Release Form of Delivery 1 HW NXP P5CD080V0B Secure Smart Card Controller8 V0B Wafer, modules and package (dice include reference T035B) 2 SW Test ROM Software (the IC Dedicated Test Software) 63 test ROM on the chip (tmfos_63.lst) 3 SW Boot ROM Software (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software) 63 test ROM on the chip (tmfos_63.lst) 4 SW MIFARE Operating System (part of theIC Dedicated Support Software) 2.0 test ROM on the chip (tmfos_63.lst) 5 SW Crypto Library 2.0 Binary files 6 DOC NXP Semiconductors Data Sheet, P5Cx02x/040/073/080/144 family [27] 3.1 electronic document 7 DOC Instruction Set [28] 1.1 electronic document 8 DOC Guidance Documents [12]- [20], [25] see chapter 13 electronic document Table 2: Deliverables of the TOE 8 For details on the NXP P5CD080V0B Secure Smart Card Controller and the IC Dedicated Software see Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0410-2007 [22] and its Assurance Continuity Maintenance Report [26]. 12 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report The hardware part of the TOE is identified by P5CD080V0B, P5CN080V0B, P5CC080V0B and P5CC073V0B. A so-called nameplate (on-chip identifier) is coded in a metal mask onto the chip during production and can be checked by the customer, too. The nameplate T035B is specific for the SSMC (Singapore) production site as outlined in the guidance documentation [25]. This nameplate identifies Version V0B of the hardware, but does not identify specifically the TOE configurations. For identification of a specific configuration, the Device Coding Bytes stored in the EEPROM can be used (see [27], chapter 11.7): The value 28 hex as Device Coding Byte identifies the chip P5CD080V0B. The value 27 hex as Device Coding Byte identifies the chip P5CN080V0B. The value 26 hex as Device Coding Byte identifies the chip P5CC080V0B. The value 16 hex as Device Coding Byte identifies the chip P5CC073V0B. Items 2 and 3 in table 2 are not delivered as single pieces, but included in the Test ROM part of the chip. They are identified by their unique version numbers. The delivery process from NXP to their customers (to phase 4 or phase 5 of the life cycle) guarantees, that the customer is aware of the exact versions of the different parts of the TOE as outlined above. Further information on secure delivery procedures of the hardware platform are given in [22] and [25]. The Crypto Library is intended to be supplied to “users”, who are developers of operating systems or other software to be embedded into the SmartMX chips. The library will be supplied to the users as a set of binary library files, to enable the “users” to incorporate the crypto library into their operating systems. It has to be made sure the user of the Crypto Library receives a correct version of the Crypto Library. The customer has to fill in a so-called Order Entry Form for Crypto Libraries. There he has to make sure to select the correct device and to mark the Common Criteria evaluated check-box to make sure to get the library CC certified for this device. More details are given in [12]. The reference of the hardware part of the TOE is checked by visual inspection. The surface of the TOE consists of the label “T035B”. The reference of the software part of the TOE is checked by using the SHA-256 hash values. The values are provided in the in user guidance manual [13]. 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: The security policy of the TOE is to provide basic Security Functions to be used by the smart card operating system and the smart card application thus providing an overall smart card system security. Therefore, the TOE will implement an algorithm to ensure the confidentiality of plain text data by encryption and to support secure authentication protocols and it will provide a random number generator. As the TOE is a hardware security platform, the security policy of the TOE is also to provide protection against leakage of information (e.g. to ensure the confidentiality of cryptographic keys during cryptographic functions performed by the TOE), against physical probing, against malfunctions, against physical manipulations and against abuse of functionality. Hence the TOE shall ● maintain the integrity and the confidentiality of data stored in the memory of the TOE and 13 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 ● maintain the integrity, the correct operation and the confidentiality of Security Functions (security mechanisms and associated functions) provided by the 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: Protection during Packaging, Finishing and Personalization, Usage of Hardware Platform, Treatment of User Data, Check of initialisation data by the Smartcard Embedded Software, Usage of Key-dependent Functions. Details can be found in the Security Target [3] resp. [5], chapter 3 and the Protection Profile BSI-PP-0002-2001. 5 Architectural Information This chapter provides a high-level description of the IT product and its major components based on the evaluation evidence described in the Common Criteria assurance family entitled “High-level design”. The Smartcard IC Platform Protection Profile [4] describes general requirements for smart card controllers and their support software. The Hardware Security Target [23] defines the functionality of the platform provided by the P5CD080V0B Smart Card Controller. The Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B provides additional functionality to the developer of Smartcard Embedded Software. It is a supplement of the basic cryptographic features provided by the hardware platform. In addition, the Crypto Library implements a software (pseudo) random number generator which is initialised (seeded) by the hardware random number generator of the SmartMX. Finally, the TOE provides a secure copy routine and includes internal security measures for residual information protection. The TOE contains a cryptographic library, which provides a set of cryptographic functions that can be used by the Smartcard Embedded Software. The cryptographic library consists of several binary packages that are intended to be linked to the Smartcard Embedded Software. The Smartcard Embedded Software developer links the binary packages that he needs to his Smartcard Embedded Software and the whole is subsequently implemented in the User ROM. The Crypto Library is implemented as a set of subsystems. The division into subsystems is chosen according to the cryptographic algorithms provided. The Crypto Library subsystems are: RSA Key Generation, RSA, SHA, AES, DES, ECC over GF(p), Random Numbers, Utility. The TOE includes internal security measures for residual information protection and provides a secure copy routine. 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. 14 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report 7 IT Product Testing 7.1 Hardware platform testing The hardware platform tests performed by the developer were divided into six categories: 1. Technology development tests as the earliest tests to check the technology against the specification and to get the technology parameters used in simulations of the circuitry (this testing is not strictly related to Security Functions); 2. Tests which are performed in a simulation environment with different tools for the analogue circuitries and for the digital parts of the TOE; 3. Regression tests of the hardware within a simulation environment based on special software dedicated only for the regression tests; 4. Regression tests which are performed for the IC Dedicated Test Software and for the IC Dedicated Support Software on emulator versions of the TOE and within a software simulation of chip in special hardware; 5. Characterisation and verification tests to release the TOE to production. 6. Functional production tests, which are done for every chip to check its correct functionality as a last step of the production process (phase 3). Further information on the hardware testing are given in the Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-410-2007 [22]. 7.2 Crypto Library testing For the Crypto Library, the developer has defined an extensive test set. The test set covers all TOE interfaces, and all modes of operation of the implemented algorithms, as well as all available parameters. The evaluator was provided with a copy of the required software and hardware, together with the means required to generate the TOE. This allowed the evaluator to perform the complete test set as defined by the developer, in addition to the tests defined by the evaluator. The hardware test results are extendable to composite evaluations on this hardware TOE, provided that TOE is operated according to its guidance and the composite evaluation requirements are met. The following tests are performed – DES/AES/RNG/SHA functionality, functionality and leakage protection of RSA and ECDSA/ECDH/EC Key Generation, sensitivity to fault injection and ECC Penetration testing. All test results were as expected. All security functions have been tested at least once, by repeating the extensive set of full- automated tests of the developer. Furthermore, the evaluator performeded an additional RSA key generation test case. The testing was largely automated using a test-OS that allows access to the functions. Test scripts were extensively used to verify that the functions return the expected values. Side channel protection has been assessed as part of the vulnerability analysis. The overall conclusion is that the Crypto Library is protected against attackers possessing a high attack potential for all scenarios considered. 15 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 8 Evaluated Configuration This certification covers the following configurations of the TOE: ● P5CD080V0B with Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 (Singapore, SSMC), ● P5CN080V0B with Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 (Singapore, SSMC), ● P5CC080V0B with Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 (Singapore, SSMC), ● P5CC073V0B with Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 (Singapore, SSMC). The Crypto Library provides AES, DES, Triple-DES (3DES), RSA, RSA key generation, RSA public key computation, ECC over GF(p), ECC over GF(p) key generation, ECC Diffie-Hellman key-exchange, SHA-1, SHA-224 and SHA-256 algorithms. The TOE supports various key sizes for RSA up to a limit of 5024 bits. Conformance with the evaluation requirement Strength of Function: High requires a minimum key size of 1024 bits. The TOE supports various key sizes for ECC over GF(p) up to a limit of 544 bits. All with the specific IC Dedicated Software and with production line indicator T035B for Singapore. All the evaluation and certification results therefore are only effective for these versions of the TOE. 9 Results of the Evaluation 9.1 CC specific results The Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) [6] was provided by the ITSEF according to the Common Criteria [7], the Methodology [1], the requirements of the Scheme [1] and all interpretations and guidelines of the Scheme (AIS) [9] as relevant for the TOE. The Evaluation Methodology CEM [8] was used for those components used up to EAL 4 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 4 and guidance specific for the technology of the product [9] (AIS 34). The following guidance specific for the technology was used: (i) Functionality classes and evaluation methodology of deterministic random number generators (ii) The Application of CC to Integrated Circuits (iii) Application of Attack Potential to Smart Cards (iv) Functionality classes and evaluation methodology of physical random number generators (see [9], AIS 20, AIS 25, AIS 26, AIS 31 were used.) 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 class ASE. 16 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report • All components of the EAL 5 augmented package as defined in the CC (see also part C of this report). • The components ALC_DVS.2, AVA_MSU.3 and AVA_VLA.4 augmented for this TOE evaluation. The evaluation has confirmed: • PP Conformance: Schutzprofil Smartcard IC Platform Protection Profile, 1.0, BSI CC-PP-0002-2001 [4] • Functionality: BSI-CC-PP-0002-2001 conformant plus product specific extensions Common Criteria Part 2 extended • Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, AVA_MSU.3, AVA_VLA.4. • The following TOE Security Functions fulfil the claimed Strength of Function: high F.RNG_Access – implementation of a software RNG and tests for the hardware RNG. F.LOG – implements measures to limit or eliminate the information that might be contained in the shape and amplitude of signals or in the time between events found by measuring such signals. It includes software countermeasures against side channel attacks. F.COPY – implements a secure copy routine which includes randomization as a countermeasure. F.SHA – implements SHA-1, SHA-224 and SHA-256 according to the standard FIPS 180-1. The algorithms SHA-224 and SHA-256 do fulfil the claimed Strength of Function high, the SHA-1 does not. For appropriate usage of the TOE, chapter 10 and [24] should be considered. In order to assess the Strength of Function the scheme interpretations AIS 20, AIS 25, AIS 26, AIS 31(see [9]) were used. 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 rating of the Strength of Functions does not include the cryptoalgorithms suitable for encryption and decryption (see BSIG Section 4, Para. 3, Clause 2). This holds for the following TOE Security Functions: – F.AES implements AES encryption. – F.DES implements Triple-DES encryption and decryption. The following cryptographic algorithms are used by the TOE to enforce its security policy: – hash functions: 17 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 SHA-1, SHA-224 and SHA-256 according to FIPS 180-1. – algorithms for the encryption and decryption: RSA, EC-DSA. This holds for the following TOE Security Functions: – F.RSA_encrypt implements RSA encryption and decryption using 1024 to 5024 bit, rated in [24]. – F.RSA_sign implements RSA algorithm using 1024 to 5024 bit keys, rated in [24]. – F.RSA_public implements RSA algorithm using 1024 to 4096 bit keys, rated in [24]. – F.ECC_GF_p_ECDSA provide ECC Signature functions with a TOE supporting key length from 160 to 544 bits, rated in [24]. – F.ECC_GF_p_KeyGen performs a ECC Key Generation with a TOE supporting key length from 160 to 544 bits, rated in [24]. – F.ECC_GF_p_DH_keyExch provides a ECC Key Exchange function with a TOE supporting key length from 160 to 544, rated in [24]. – F.RSA_KeyGen generates RSA key pairs with a TOE supported length of 1024 to 4096 bits , rated in [24]. The strength of the cryptographic algorithms was not rated in the course of this evaluation (see BSIG Section 4, Para. 3, Clause 2). The commitment of each algorithm as per [24]. The validity period of each algorithm is mentioned in the official catalogue [24]. 10 Obligations and notes for the usage of the TOE The operational 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, the following aspects need to be fulfilled when using the TOE: • Periodically a new official catalogue is published on the homepage of the German Federal Network Agency. The actual version of the catalogue holds for the strength of the TOE`s Security Functions F.RSA_encrypt, F.RSA_sign, F.RSA_public, F.ECC_GF_p_ECDSA, F.ECC_GF_p_KeyGen, F.RSA_KeyGen and F.ECC_GF_p_DH_keyExch. The user is obliged to take the information of the actual version of [24] into account. • Signature creation and verification using RSA encryption, decryption and key generation with a keylength from 1024 to 2048 bits. A usage of 2048 bits is recommended. From 1974 bits keylength the current recommended period of usage is by the end of 2014 [24]. • Signature creation and verification according to ECDSA and Elliptic Curve (EC) key generation standard with 192 - 544 bits key sizes. From 224 bits keylenght the current recommended period of usage is by the end of 2014 [24]. • A usage of SHA-224 and SHA-254 is currently recommended by the end of 2014. A usage of the SHA-1 algorithm cannot be recommended for a high security environment [24]. • The operational documentation [12 - 20], [25] contains necessary information about the usage of the TOE. For secure usage of the TOE the fulfilment of the assumptions 18 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report about the environment in the Security Target [3, 22] has to be taken into account. Especially the advice by the hardware user guidance [25] given in section 5.1 and 4.3.2 must be implemented by the user. 11 Security Target For the purpose of publishing, the Security Target [9] of the Target of Evaluation (TOE) is provided within a separate document as Annex A of this report. It is a sanitised version of the complete Security Target [6] used for the evaluation performed. Sanitisation was performed according to the rules as outlined in the relevant CCRA policy (see AIS 35 [4]). 12 Definitions 12.1 Acronyms AES Advanced Encryption Standard BSI Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik / Federal Office for Information Security, Bonn, Germany CCRA Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement CC Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation DES Data Encryption Standard ECC Elliptic Curve Cryptography EAL Evaluation Assurance Level IT Information Technology ITSEF Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility PP Protection Profile RSA Rivest Shamir Adleman Algorithmus SF Security Function SFP Security Function Policy SHA Secure Hash Algorithm SOF Strength of Function ST Security Target TOE Target of Evaluation TSC TSF Scope of Control TSF TOE Security Functions TSP TOE Security Policy 19 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 12.2 Glossary Augmentation - The addition of one or more assurance component(s) from CC Part 3 to an EAL or assurance package. Extension - The addition to an ST or PP of functional requirements not contained in part 2 and/or assurance requirements not contained in part 3 of the CC. Formal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics based on well- established mathematical concepts. Informal - Expressed in natural language. Object - An entity within the TSC that contains or receives information and upon which subjects perform operations. Protection Profile - An implementation-independent set of security requirements for a category of TOEs that meet specific consumer needs. Security Function - A part or parts of the TOE that have to be relied upon for enforcing a closely related subset of the rules from the TSP. Security Target - A set of security requirements and specifications to be used as the basis for evaluation of an identified TOE. Semiformal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics. Strength of Function - A qualification of a TOE security function expressing the minimum efforts assumed necessary to defeat its expected security behaviour by directly attacking its underlying security mechanisms. SOF-basic - A level of the TOE strength of function where analysis shows that the function provides adequate protection against casual breach of TOE security by attackers possessing a low attack potential. SOF-medium - A level of the TOE strength of function where analysis shows that the function provides adequate protection against straightforward or intentional breach of TOE security by attackers possessing a moderate attack potential. SOF-high - A level of the TOE strength of function where analysis shows that the function provides adequate protection against deliberately planned or organised breach of TOE security by attackers possessing a high attack potential. Subject - An entity within the TSC that causes operations to be performed. Target of Evaluation - An IT product or system and its associated administrator and user guidance documentation that is the subject of an evaluation. TOE Security Functions - A set consisting of all hardware, software, and firmware of the TOE that must be relied upon for the correct enforcement of the TSP. TOE Security Policy - A set of rules that regulate how assets are managed, protected and distributed within a TOE. TSF Scope of Control - The set of interactions that can occur with or within a TOE and are subject to the rules of the TSP. 20 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report 13 Bibliography [1] BSI certification: Procedural Description (BSI 7125) [2] German IT Security Certificates (BSI 7148, BSI 7149), periodically updated list published also on the BSI Website [3] Security Target BSI-DSZ-0417-2008, Version 1.1, 07 November 2007, Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH (confidential document) [4] Protection Profile BSI-PP-0002.2001, Version 1.0, July 2001, by Atmel Smart Card ICs, Hitachi Europe Ltd., Infineon Technologies AG, Philips Semiconductors [5] Security Target Lite BSI-DSZ-0417-2008, Version 1.1, 07 November 2007, Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH (sanitised public document) [6] Evaluation Technical Report, 3.0, 04 April 2008, Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B, Brightsight BV (confidential document) [7] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 2.3, August 2005 [8] Common Methology for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CEM), Evaluation Methology, Version 2.3, August 2005 [9] Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme (AIS) as relevant for the TOE.9 [10] ETR-lite for composition according to AIS 36 for the Product Secured Crypto Library on the P5CD080V0B, 3.1, 07 March 2007, Brightsight BV (confidential document) [11] Configuration list for the TOE, 1.4, 07 November 2007, List of Configuration Items (confidential document) [12] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the P5Cx02x/040/080/144 Family, Revision 3.1, 7 November 2007 9 specifically • AIS 25, Version 3, 6 August 2007, Anwendung der CC auf Integrierte Schaltungen including JIL Document resp. CC Supporting Document • AIS 26, Version 3, 6 August 2007, Evaluationsmethodologie für in Hardware integrierte Schaltungen including JIL Document resp. CC Supporting Document • AIS 31, Version 1, 25 Sept. 2001 Funktionalitätsklassen und Evaluationsmethodologie für physikalische Zufallszahlengeneratoren • AIS 32, Version 1, 2 July 2001, Übernahme international abgestimmter CC-Interpretationen ins deutsche Zertifizierungsschema. • AIS 34, Version 1.00, 1 June 2004, Evaluation Methodology for CC Assurance Classes for EAL5+ • AIS 35, Version 2.0, 12 November 2007, Öffentliche Fassung des Security Targets (ST-Lite) including JIL Document resp. CC Supporting Document and CCRA policies • AIS 36, Version 2, 12 November 2007, Kompositionsevaluierung including JIL Document resp. CC Supporting Document • AIS 38, Version 2.0, 28 September 2007, Reuse of evaluation results 21 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 [13] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Pseudo Random Number Generator & Chi-Squared Test Library, Revision 5.0, August 24th, 2007 [14] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Secured AES Library, Revision 1.1, 7 November, 2007 [15] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Secured DES Library, Revision 3.0, 24 August, 2007 [16] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – SHA Library, Revision 4.0, 24 August, 2007 [17] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Secured RSA Library, Revision 4.0, 24 August, 2007 [18] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Secured RSA Key Generation Library, Revision 4.0, 24 August 24th, 2007 [19] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Secured ECC Library, Revision 1.0, 24 August, 2007 [20] NXP Semiconductors User Guidance: Secured Crypto Library on the SmartMX – Utility Library, Revision 1.0, 24 August, 2007 [21] Security Target Lite BSI-DSZ-0411-2007, Version 1.0, P5CD144/P5CN144/ P5CC144V0B, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH, 21 March 2007 (sanitised public document) [22] Certification Report for NXP Secure Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B, P5CN080V0B and P5CC080V0B each with specific IC Dedicated Software, BSI- DSZ-CC-410-2007, 05.07.2007, BSI [23] Security Target Lite BSI-DSZ-0410-2007, Version 1.1, P5CD080/P5CN080/ P5CC080V0B, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH, 09 May 2007 (sanitised public document) [24] Bundesnetzagentur: Bekanntmachung zur elektronischen Signatur nach dem Signaturgesetz und der Signaturverordnung (Übersicht über geeignete Algorithmen), German "Bundesanzeiger Nr. 19", published February 5th, 2008, page 376 [25] Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual for the P5Cx012/02x/040/073/ 080/144V0B Family of Secure Smart Card Controllers, NXP Semiconductors, Business Line Identification, Version 1.7, 25. Ferbruary 2008 [26] Assurance Continuity Maintenance Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0410-2007-MA-01, July 2007, NXP Secure Smart Card Controller P5CC073V0B with specific IC Dedicated Software, BSI [27] Data Sheet P5Cx02x/040/073/080/144 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, Revision 3.3, 7 August 2007, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH [28] Instruction Set SmartMX-Family, Secure Smart Card Controller, Objective Specification, Revision 1.1, 4 July 2006, NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH 22 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report C Excerpts from the Criteria CC Part1: Conformance results (chapter 7.4) „The conformance result indicates the source of the collection of requirements that is met by a TOE or PP that passes its evaluation. This conformance result is presented with respect to CC Part 2 (functional requirements), CC Part 3 (assurance requirements) and, if applicable, to a pre-defined set of requirements (e.g., EAL, Protection Profile). The conformance result consists of one of the following: – CC Part 2 conformant - A PP or TOE is CC Part 2 conformant if the functional requirements are based only upon functional components in CC Part 2. – CC Part 2 extended - A PP or TOE is CC Part 2 extended if the functional requirements include functional components not in CC Part 2. plus one of the following: – CC Part 3 conformant - A PP or TOE is CC Part 3 conformant if the assurance requirements are based only upon assurance components in CC Part 3. – CC Part 3 extended - A PP or TOE is CC Part 3 extended if the assurance requirements include assurance requirements not in CC Part 3. Additionally, the conformance result may include a statement made with respect to sets of defined requirements, in which case it consists of one of the following: – Package name Conformant - A PP or TOE is conformant to a pre-defined named functional and/or assurance package (e.g. EAL) if the requirements (functions or assurance) include all components in the packages listed as part of the conformance result. – Package name Augmented - A PP or TOE is an augmentation of a pre-defined named functional and/or assurance package (e.g. EAL) if the requirements (functions or assurance) are a proper superset of all components in the packages listed as part of the conformance result. Finally, the conformance result may also include a statement made with respect to Protection Profiles, in which case it includes the following: – PP Conformant - A TOE meets specific PP(s), which are listed as part of the conformance result.“ 23 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 CC Part 3: Protection Profile criteria overview (chapter 8.2) “The goal of a PP evaluation is to demonstrate that the PP is complete, consistent, technically sound, and hence suitable for use as a statement of requirements for one or more evaluatable TOEs. Such a PP may be eligible for inclusion within a PP registry.” “Assurance Class Assurance Family TOE description (APE_DES) Security environment (APE_ENV) Class APE: Protection Profile evaluation PP introduction (APE_INT) Security objectives (APE_OBJ) IT security requirements (APE_REQ) Explicitly stated IT security requirements (APE_SRE) Table 3 - Protection Profile families - CC extended requirements ” Security Target criteria overview (Chapter 8.3) “The goal of an ST evaluation is to demonstrate that the ST is complete, consistent, technically sound, and hence suitable for use as the basis for the corresponding TOE evaluation.” “Assurance Class Assurance Family TOE description (ASE_DES) Security environment (ASE_ENV) ST introduction (ASE_INT) Class ASE: Security Target evaluation Security objectives (ASE_OBJ) PP claims (ASE_PPC) IT security requirements (ASE_REQ) Explicitly stated IT security requirements (ASE_SRE) TOE summary specification (ASE_TSS) Table 5 - Security Target families - CC extended requirements ” 24 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report Assurance categorisation (chapter 7.5) “The assurance classes, families, and the abbreviation for each family are shown in Table 1. Assurance Class Assurance Family CM automation (ACM_AUT) ACM: Configuration management CM capabilities (ACM_CAP) CM scope (ACM_SCP) ADO: Delivery and operation Delivery (ADO_DEL) Installation, generation and start-up (ADO_IGS) Functional specification (ADV_FSP) High-level design (ADV_HLD) Implementation representation (ADV_IMP) ADV: Development TSF internals (ADV_INT) Low-level design (ADV_LLD) Representation correspondence (ADV_RCR) Security policy modeling (ADV_SPM) AGD: Guidance documents Administrator guidance (AGD_ADM) User guidance (AGD_USR) Development security (ALC_DVS) ALC: Life cycle support Flaw remediation (ALC_FLR) Life cycle definition (ALC_LCD) Tools and techniques (ALC_TAT) Coverage (ATE_COV) ATE: Tests Depth (ATE_DPT) Functional tests (ATE_FUN) Independent testing (ATE_IND) Covert channel analysis (AVA_CCA) AVA: Vulnerability assessment Misuse (AVA_MSU) Strength of TOE security functions (AVA_SOF) Vulnerability analysis (AVA_VLA) Table 1: Assurance family breakdown and mapping” 25 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Evaluation assurance levels (chapter 11) “The Evaluation Assurance Levels (EALs) provide an increasing scale that balances the level of assurance obtained with the cost and feasibility of acquiring that degree of assurance. The CC approach identifies the separate concepts of assurance in a TOE at the end of the evaluation, and of maintenance of that assurance during the operational use of the TOE. It is important to note that not all families and components from CC Part 3 are included in the EALs. This is not to say that these do not provide meaningful and desirable assurances. Instead, it is expected that these families and components will be considered for augmentation of an EAL in those PPs and STs for which they provide utility.” Evaluation assurance level (EAL) overview (chapter 11.1) “Table 6 represents a summary of the EALs. The columns represent a hierarchically ordered set of EALs, while the rows represent assurance families. Each number in the resulting matrix identifies a specific assurance component where applicable. As outlined in the next section, seven hierarchically ordered evaluation assurance levels are defined in the CC for the rating of a TOE's assurance. They are hierarchically ordered inasmuch as each EAL represents more assurance than all lower EALs. The increase in assurance from EAL to EAL is accomplished by substitution of a hierarchically higher assurance component from the same assurance family (i.e. increasing rigour, scope, and/ or depth) and from the addition of assurance components from other assurance families (i.e. adding new requirements). These EALs consist of an appropriate combination of assurance components as described in chapter 7 of this Part 3. More precisely, each EAL includes no more than one component of each assurance family and all assurance dependencies of every component are addressed. While the EALs are defined in the CC, it is possible to represent other combinations of assurance. Specifically, the notion of “augmentation” allows the addition of assurance components (from assurance families not already included in the EAL) or the substitution of assurance components (with another hierarchically higher assurance component in the same assurance family) to an EAL. Of the assurance constructs defined in the CC, only EALs may be augmented. The notion of an “EAL minus a constituent assurance component” is not recognised by the standard as a valid claim. Augmentation carries with it the obligation on the part of the claimant to justify the utility and added value of the added assurance component to the EAL. An EAL may also be extended with explicitly stated assurance requirements. 26 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report Assurance Class Assurance Family Assurance Components by Evaluation Assurance Level EAL1 EAL2 EAL3 EAL4 EAL5 EAL6 EAL7 Configuration management ACM_AUT 1 1 2 2 ACM_CAP 1 2 3 4 4 5 5 ACM_SCP 1 2 3 3 3 Delivery and operation ADO_DEL 1 1 2 2 2 3 ADO_IGS 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Development ADV_FSP 1 1 1 2 3 3 4 ADV_HLD 1 2 2 3 4 5 ADV_IMP 1 2 3 3 ADV_INT 1 2 3 ADV_LLD 1 1 2 2 ADV_RCR 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 ADV_SPM 1 3 3 3 Guidance documents AGD_ADM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 AGD_USR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Life cycle support ALC_DVS 1 1 1 2 2 ALC_FLR ALC_LCD 1 2 2 3 ALC_TAT 1 2 3 3 Tests ATE_COV 1 2 2 2 3 3 ATE_DPT 1 1 2 2 3 ATE_FUN 1 1 1 1 2 2 ATE_IND 1 2 2 2 2 2 3 Vulnerability assessment AVA_CCA 1 2 2 AVA_MSU 1 2 2 3 3 AVA_SOF 1 1 1 1 1 1 AVA_VLA 1 1 2 3 4 4 Table 6: Evaluation assurance level summary” 27 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Evaluation assurance level 1 (EAL1) - functionally tested (chapter 11.3) “Objectives EAL1 is applicable where some confidence in correct operation is required, but the threats to security are not viewed as serious. It will be of value where independent assurance is required to support the contention that due care has been exercised with respect to the protection of personal or similar information. EAL1 provides an evaluation of the TOE as made available to the customer, including independent testing against a specification, and an examination of the guidance documentation provided. It is intended that an EAL1 evaluation could be successfully conducted without assistance from the developer of the TOE, and for minimal outlay. An evaluation at this level should provide evidence that the TOE functions in a manner consistent with its documentation, and that it provides useful protection against identified threats.” Evaluation assurance level 2 (EAL2) - structurally tested (chapter 11.4) “Objectives EAL2 requires the co-operation of the developer in terms of the delivery of design information and test results, but should not demand more effort on the part of the developer than is consistent with good commercial practice. As such it should not require a substantially increased investment of cost or time. EAL2 is therefore applicable in those circumstances where developers or users require a low to moderate level of independently assured security in the absence of ready availability of the complete development record. Such a situation may arise when securing legacy systems, or where access to the developer may be limited.” Evaluation assurance level 3 (EAL3) - methodically tested and checked (chapter 11.5) “Objectives EAL3 permits a conscientious developer to gain maximum assurance from positive security engineering at the design stage without substantial alteration of existing sound development practices. EAL3 is applicable in those circumstances where developers or users require a moderate level of independently assured security, and require a thorough investigation of the TOE and its development without substantial re-engineering.” 28 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report Evaluation assurance level 4 (EAL4) - methodically designed, tested, and reviewed (chapter 11.6) “Objectives EAL4 permits a developer to gain maximum assurance from positive security engineering based on good commercial development practices which, though rigorous, do not require substantial specialist knowledge, skills, and other resources. EAL4 is the highest level at which it is likely to be economically feasible to retrofit to an existing product line. EAL4 is therefore applicable in those circumstances where developers or users require a moderate to high level of independently assured security in conventional commodity TOEs and are prepared to incur additional security-specific engineering costs.” Evaluation assurance level 5 (EAL5) - semiformally designed and tested (chapter 11.7) “Objectives EAL5 permits a developer to gain maximum assurance from security engineering based upon rigorous commercial development practices supported by moderate application of specialist security engineering techniques. Such a TOE will probably be designed and developed with the intent of achieving EAL5 assurance. It is likely that the additional costs attributable to the EAL5 requirements, relative to rigorous development without the application of specialised techniques, will not be large. EAL5 is therefore applicable in those circumstances where developers or users require a high level of independently assured security in a planned development and require a rigorous development approach without incurring unreasonable costs attributable to specialist security engineering techniques.” Evaluation assurance level 6 (EAL6) - semiformally verified design and tested (chapter 11.8) “Objectives EAL6 permits developers to gain high assurance from application of security engineering techniques to a rigorous development environment in order to produce a premium TOE for protecting high value assets against significant risks. EAL6 is therefore applicable to the development of security TOEs for application in high risk situations where the value of the protected assets justifies the additional costs.” Evaluation assurance level 7 (EAL7) - formally verified design and tested (chapter 11.9) “Objectives EAL7 is applicable to the development of security TOEs for application in extremely high risk situations and/or where the high value of the assets justifies the higher costs. Practical application of EAL7 is currently limited to TOEs with tightly focused security functionality that is amenable to extensive formal analysis.“ Strength of TOE security functions (AVA_SOF) (chapter 19.3) “Objectives 29 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Even if a TOE security function cannot be bypassed, deactivated, or corrupted, it may still be possible to defeat it because there is a vulnerability in the concept of its underlying security mechanisms. For those functions a qualification of their security behaviour can be made using the results of a quantitative or statistical analysis of the security behaviour of these mechanisms and the effort required to overcome them. The qualification is made in the form of a strength of TOE security function claim.” Vulnerability analysis (AVA_VLA) (chapter 19.4) "Objectives Vulnerability analysis is an assessment to determine whether vulnerabilities identified, during the evaluation of the construction and anticipated operation of the TOE or by other methods (e.g. by flaw hypotheses), could allow users to violate the TSP. Vulnerability analysis deals with the threats that a user will be able to discover flaws that will allow unauthorised access to resources (e.g. data), allow the ability to interfere with or alter the TSF, or interfere with the authorised capabilities of other users.” "Application notes A vulnerability analysis is performed by the developer in order to ascertain the presence of security vulnerabilities, and should consider at least the contents of all the TOE deliverables including the ST for the targeted evaluation assurance level. The developer is required to document the disposition of identified vulnerabilities to allow the evaluator to make use of that information if it is found useful as a support for the evaluator's independent vulnerability analysis.” “Independent vulnerability analysis goes beyond the vulnerabilities identified by the developer. The main intent of the evaluator analysis is to determine that the TOE is resistant to penetration attacks performed by an attacker possessing a low (for AVA_VLA.2 Independent vulnerability analysis), moderate (for AVA_VLA.3 Moderately resistant) or high (for AVA_VLA.4 Highly resistant) attack potential.” 30 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report This page is intentionally left blank. 31 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 D Annexes List of annexes of this certification report Annex A: Security Target provided within a separate document. Annex B: Evaluation results regarding development and production environment 32 / 34 BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Certification Report This page is intentionally left blank. 33 / 34 Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Annex B of Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0417-2008 Evaluation results regarding development and production environment The IT product NXP Smart Card Controller P5CD080V0B with IC dedicated software: Secured Crypto Library Release 2.0 (Target of Evaluation, TOE) has been evaluated at an accredited and licensed / approved evaluation facility using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation, Version 2.3 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 2.3 (ISO/IEC 15408:2005). As a result of the TOE certification, dated 13 June 2008, the following results regarding the development and production environment apply. The Common Criteria Security Assurance Requirements • ACM – Configuration management (i.e. ACM_AUT.1, ACM_CAP.4, ACM_SCP.3), • ADO – Delivery and operation (i.e. ADO_DEL.2, ADO_IGS.1) and • ALC – Life cycle support (i.e. ALC_DVS.2, ALC_LCD.2, ALC_TAT.2) are fulfilled for the development and production sites of the TOE listed below: a) NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH, IC Manufacturing Operations - Test Center Hamburg (IMO TeCH), Stresemannallee 101, 22529 Hamburg, Germany (test, delivery) b) NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH, Business Line Identification (BL ID), Georg- Heyken-Strasse 1, 21147 Hamburg, Germany (development center) c) NXP Semiconductors (Thailand), 303 Chaengwattana Rd., Laksi Bangkok 10210, Thailand (test, assembly, delivery) d) NXP Semiconductors GmbH, Business Line Identification, Document Control Office, Mikron-Weg 1, 8101 Gratkorn, Austria (delivery) e) Systems on Silicon Manufacturing Co. Pte. Ltd. 8 (SSMC), 70 Pasir Ris Drive 1, Singapore 519527, Singapore (semiconductor factory) f) Photronics Singapore Pte. Ltd., 6 Loyang Way 2, Loyang Industrial Park, Singapore 507099, Singapore (mask shop) g) Photronics Semiconductors Mask Corp. (PSMC), 1F, No.2, Li-Hsin Rd., Science- Based Industrial Park, Hsin-Chu City Taiwan R.O.C. (mask shop) h) Chipbond Technology Corporation, No. 3, Li-Hsin Rd. V, Science Based Industrial Park, Hsin-Chu City, Taiwan R.O.C. (wafer bumping) The TOE is manufactured in the IC fabrication SSMC in Singapore indicated by the nameplate (on-chip identifier) T035B. For development and productions sites regarding the NXP chip P5CD080V0B refer to the certification report BSI-DSZ-CC-0410-2007 [22]. For the sites listed above, the requirements have been specifically applied in accordance with the Security Target [3]. The evaluators verified, that the Threats, Security Objectives and requirements for the TOE life cycle phases up to delivery (as stated in the Security Target [3] resp. [5]) are fulfilled by the procedures of these sites. 34 / 34