One way for a product vendor to make sure that a product undergoing a Common Criteria (CC) evaluation is providing expected security functionality is to conform to a Protection Profile (PP) for that product type. PPs outline the appropriate security functionality for a given product type, and are usually…
Who is Defining the Criteria That Your Products Will Need to be Evaluated Against? I have been involved in the Common Criteria (CC) community since the first International Common Criteria Conference (ICCC) in 2000. While I spend a lot of my time down in the weeds of Common Criteria issues, it’s refreshing to look at the Common…
I have recently read several online articles questioning what it means for a cryptographic module to be FIPS 140-2 validated. While the FIPS 140-2 validation process is very complicated and replete with regulations, some of the information presented in the articles themselves and the comments made by…
In my last post, I brought everyone up to speed on some happenings from the recent ICCC Conference in Orlando, including the revised Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement (CCRA) and its implications. There was a great deal of other discussion on various topics of interest, including the subject of collaboration…
As you know, the U.S. federal government officially shut down many of its operations. This shutdown directly affects NIST and, as a result, impacts its FIPS validation activities. We are sending you this e-mail to let you know what resources Corsec has available and how this situation will impact your validation efforts.
Some of us from Corsec recently attended the 14th International Common Criteria Conference (ICCC) in Orlando, Florida, and we came away feeling that the Common Criteria (CC) community is finally coming together in many positive ways. After several years of difficult transition into defining the new CC paradigm of collaborative Protection Profiles (cPPs) and international Technical Communities (iTCs),…
It’s always great to get together with others from our industry to discuss advances and collaborate on moving processes forward for Common Criteria. Last month, several of us had the opportunity to work with colleagues from around the world at two separate events in Orlando, Florida. A group of us spent the first two weeks of September in Orlando, as Corsec sent multiple…
Getting your product listed on the DoD UC APL can seem like a Herculean task. We’ve talked before about the ins and outs of the entire listing process, but anyone who has considered any type of IT security validation knows that making the process as efficient as possible is as key as paying attention to the details. Last week, Corsec Co-Founder…
We have recently seen an increase in the number of clients who are asking about CSfC and how to get on the CSfC Components List maintained by the National Security Agency (NSA) Information Assurance Directorate (IAD). CSfC is the acronym for the IAD’s Commercial Solutions for Classified program. It’s worth noting…
In our recent post we talked about the recent changes to Common Criteria, FIPS, and UC APL, and the importance of putting these changes in context for your business. Today we have another change to tell you about. On July 25, CMVP issued an update to the FIPS 140-2 Implementation Guidance(IG). No matter where your module is in the…
Last week, I shared a conversation I had with Miguel Bañón, Convenor of ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27’s WG 3 (work group 3), that offered an overview of the current work of the WG 3, as well as some great insight into planned changes in the areas of evaluation, testing and specification for the IT security industry. Today, we’ll…
At Corsec, we have the opportunity to work with many industry insiders, partners, and labs as we help our clients through the security validation process. This provides us with a unique perspective when looking at the changes occurring within the IT security space. One group of particular interest right now is the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27’s WG 3…
According to the ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus, “There is nothing permanent except change.” As anyone following security certifications lately can tell you, there is a lot of truth in this statement. We have entered another …
In our recent blog post, we talked about the cost and timing you can expect if you pursue FIPS 140-2 revalidation for your product or system. We also touched on five change scenarios that necessitate revalidation. These scenarios were created by the Cryptographic Module Validation Program (CMVP), the same body that published the FIPS standard, which covers…
If you have been through the certification or validation process for your security product, I don’t need to tell you that it’s a substantial investment in time, resources and cost. Or that it’s worth that investment when you consider the benefits you’ll realize from your ability to sell into the lucrative government market. We discussed…
Where is the most money lost in a validation? I know this is a question my customers ask themselves while making a decision on how to achieve validation. A) Is it the consultant? B) Is it in the testing laboratory? C) Is it the scope of the process? I’ll let you in on an insider secret—the correct answer is “none of the above.” You won’t lose big in validations, or in any direct expense…
Corsec recently presented a webinar called, DoD UC APL Solutions: Dealing with UCCO, STIGS, JITC, the TIC, Army, and DoD Requirements. Judging from the large number of views and inquiries on this, the Department of Defense’s Unified Capabilities Approved Products List (DoD UC APL) is a very hot topic for many vendors, and…
At Corsec, we just celebrated our 15th year of business in the security validation consulting industry. As you might imagine, we spent some time reflecting on the changes we have seen in the industry, the customers we have had the pleasure to work with, and the successes and failures we have seen over the years.
There were a few specific things that kept coming up in these discussions—three factors we could identify that predicted success or failure in security validation projects.
A security validation is a substantial process—getting it started can be daunting. But you don’t need to decide everything up front—in fact, you shouldn’t. There are definitely some important considerations to work through, but there are some decisions you should put off until you are well into the process.
Once you have spent the time and money to pursue a security validation, you’re all done, right? Well, not exactly. However, the good news is that it isn’t hard or expensive to maintain your validation.
For most security validations, the validation applies to a specific version of hardware and software. At the beginning of your evaluation you must choose which versions of your product you are taking through the validation process.