Certification Report: 0858V2a_pdf

Certification Report: 0858V2a_pdf

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

for

NXP Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers

P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated

Software

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

CC-Zert-327 V5.1

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 (*)

Smartcard Controller

NXP Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software

from

PP Conformance:

Functionality:

Assurance:

NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH

Security IC Platform Protection Profile, Version 1.0,

15 June 2007, BSI-CC-PP-0035-2007

PP conformant plus product specific extensions

Common Criteria Part 2 extended

Common Criteria Part 3 conformant

EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, ASE_TSS.2 and

AVA_VAN.5

SOGIS

Recognition Agreement

The IT Product identified in this certificate has been evaluated at an approved evaluation facility using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 5 and CC

Supporting Documents as listed in the Certification Report 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.

(*) 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.

Common Criteria

Recognition Arrangement for components up to

EAL 4

Bonn, 27 April 2015

For the Federal Office for Information Security

Bernd Kowalski

Head of Department

L.S.

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-0858-V2-2015

This page is intentionally left blank.

4 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Preliminary Remarks

Under the BSIG 1 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 on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Gesetz - BSIG) of 14 August 2009,

Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2821

5 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Contents

A. Certification........................................................................................................................7

1. Specifications of the Certification Procedure.................................................................7

2. Recognition Agreements................................................................................................7

3. Performance of Evaluation and Certification..................................................................9

4. Validity of the Certification Result...................................................................................9

5. Publication....................................................................................................................10

B. Certification Results.........................................................................................................11

1. Executive Summary.....................................................................................................12

2. Identification of the TOE...............................................................................................13

3. Security Policy..............................................................................................................15

4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope.......................................................................16

5. Architectural Information...............................................................................................16

6. Documentation.............................................................................................................17

7. IT Product Testing.........................................................................................................17

8. Evaluated Configuration...............................................................................................18

9. Results of the Evaluation..............................................................................................18

10. Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE.......................................................20

11. Security Target............................................................................................................20

12. Definitions...................................................................................................................20

13. Bibliography................................................................................................................23

C. Excerpts from the Criteria................................................................................................26

CC Part 1:........................................................................................................................26

CC Part 3:........................................................................................................................27

D. Annexes...........................................................................................................................34

6 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 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:

Act on the Federal Office for Information Security

2

BSI Certification and Approval Ordinance 3

BSI Schedule of Costs 4

Special decrees issued by the Bundesministerium des Innern (Federal Ministry of the

Interior)

DIN EN ISO/IEC 17065 standard

BSI certification: Technical information on the IT security certification, Procedural

Description (BSI 7138) [3]

BSI certification: Requirements regarding the Evaluation Facility (BSI 7125) [3]

Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.1

ISO/IEC 15408.

5

[1] also published as

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

4

5

2

2.

Recognition Agreements

In order to avoid multiple certification of the same product in different countries a mutual recognition of IT security certificates - as far as such certificates are based on ITSEC or

CC - under certain conditions was agreed.

2.1. European Recognition of ITSEC/CC – Certificates (SOGIS-MRA)

The SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement (SOGIS-MRA) Version 3 became effective in

April 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 and ITSEC Evaluation Assurance Levels E1 to E3 (basic). For

Act on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Gesetz - BSIG) of 14 August 2009,

Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2821

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

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

Proclamation of the Bundesministerium des Innern of 12 February 2007 in the Bundesanzeiger dated

23 February 2007, p. 3730

7 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

"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. This Domain is linked to a conformance claim to one of the related SOGIS Recommended Protection Profiles. In addition, certificates issued for Protection Profiles based on Common Criteria are part of the recognition agreement.

As of September 2011 the new agreement has been signed by the national bodies of

Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Details on recognition and the history of the agreement can be found at https://www.bsi.bund.de/zertifizierung .

The SOGIS-MRA logo printed on the certificate indicates that it is recognised under the terms of this agreement by the nations listed above.

This certificate is recognized under SOGIS-MRA for all assurance components selected.

2.2. 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), certificates based on assurance components up to and including EAL 2 or the assurance family Flaw Remediation (ALC_FLR) and certificates for Protection Profiles and for collaborative Protection Profiles (cPP).

The CCRA-2014 replaces the old CCRA signed in May 2000 (CCRA-2000). Certificates based on CCRA-2000, issued before 08 September 2014 are still under recognition according to the rules of CCRA-2000. For on 08 September 2014 ongoing certification procedures and for Assurance Continuity (maintenance and re-certification) of old certificates a transition period on the recognition of certificates according to the rules of

CCRA-2000 (i.e. assurance components up to and including EAL 4 or the assurance family Flaw Remediation (ALC_FLR)) is defined until 08 September 2017.

As of September 2014 the signatories of the new CCRA are government representatives from the following nations: Australia, Austria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland,

France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, The Netherlands,

New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Turkey,

United Kingdom, and the United States.

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 nations listed above.

As this certificate is a re-certification of a certificate issued according to CCRA-2000 this certificate is recognized according to the rules of CCRA-2000, i.e. up to and including CC part 3 EAL 4 components. The evaluation contained the components ADV_FSP.5,

ADV_INT.2, ADV_TDS.4, ALC_CMS.5, ALC_DVS.2, ALC_TAT.2, ASE_TSS.2, ATE_DPT.3 and AVA_VAN.5 that are not mutually recognised in accordance with the provisions of the

CCRA-2000, for mutual recognition the EAL 4 components of these assurance families are relevant.

8 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

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 Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software has undergone the certification procedure at BSI. This is a re-certification based on BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-2013.

Specific results from the evaluation process BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-2013 were re-used.

The evaluation of the product NXP Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/

V0B(s), P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software was conducted by T-Systems

GEI GmbH. The evaluation was completed on 21 April 2015. T-Systems GEI GmbH is an

evaluation facility (ITSEF) 6 recognised by the certification body of BSI.

For this certification procedure the sponsor and 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.

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, as specified in the following report and in the Security Target.

For the meaning of the assurance levels please refer to the excerpts from the criteria at the end of the Certification Report.

The Certificate issued confirms the assurance of the product claimed in the Security Target at the date of certification. As attack methods evolve over time, the resistance of the certified version of the product against new attack methods needs to be re-assessed.

Therefore, the sponsor should apply for the certified product being monitored within the assurance continuity program of the BSI Certification Scheme (e.g. by a re-certification).

Specifically, if results of the certification are used in subsequent evaluation and certification procedures, in a system integration process or if a user's risk management needs regularly updated results, it is recommended to perform a re-assessment on a regular e.g. annual basis.

In order to avoid an indefinite usage of the certificate when evolved attack methods 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 27 April 2015 is valid until 26 April 2020. The validity date can be extended by re-assessment or re-certification.

6

Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility

9 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

The owner of the certificate is obliged

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 and the

Security Target and user guidance documentation mentioned herein to any applicant 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 product's evaluated life cycle, e.g. related to development and production sites or processes, occur or the confidentiality of documentation and information related to the product or resulting from the evaluation and certification procedure is not given any longer. In particular, prior to the dissemination of confidential documentation and information related to the product or resulting from the evaluation and certification procedure that do not belong to the product deliverables according to the Certification Report part B chapter 2 to third parties, permission of the Certification Body at BSI has to be obtained.

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 Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software 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 developer

7 of the

product. The Certification Report may also be obtained in electronic form at the internet address stated above.

7 NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH

Stresemannallee 101

22529 Hamburg

10 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

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.

Certification Report

11 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

1.

Executive Summary

The NXP Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC128V0v/

V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software provide a hardware platform for the implementation of smart card operating systems including multiple applications. The hardware platform provides coprocessors for cryptographic algorithms Triple-DES with up to three keys and

AES with different key lengths as well as a coprocessor for large integer arithmetic operations. In addition the hardware platform includes a True Random Number Generator suitable to generate cryptographic keys. The TOE supports the ISO/IEC 7816 contact interface with UART and the ISO/IEC 14443 A contactless interface. The contactless interface together with IO3 can be configured in S2C mode to support Near Field

Communication (NFC). The implementation of multiple applications is supported by the

CPU offering different CPU modes with gradual permissions and memory management control supporting the separation of different memory segments. The MIFARE FleX or

MIFARE MSO as part of the IC Dedicated Software does not contribute to security mechanisms of the devices and was not subject of the evaluation.

The Security Target [6] is the basis for this certification. It is based on the certified

Protection Profile Security IC Platform Protection Profile, Version 1.0, 15 June 2007,

BSI-CC-PP-0035-2007 [7].

The TOE Security Assurance Requirements (SAR) are based entirely on the assurance components defined in Part 3 of the Common Criteria (see part C or [1], Part 3 for details).

The TOE meets the assurance requirements of the Evaluation Assurance Level EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, ASE_TSS.2 and AVA_VAN.5.

The TOE Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the TOE are outlined in the

Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 6. 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

SS.RNG Random Number Generator

SS.HW_DES

SS.HW_AES

SF.OPC

SF.PHY

Triple-DES coprocessor

AES coprocessor

Control of Operating Conditions

Protection against Physical Manipulation

SF.LOG

SF.COMP

SF.MEM_ACC

SF.SFR_ACC

Logical Protection

Protection of Mode Control

Memory Access Control

Special Function Register Access Control

Table 1: TOE Security Functionalities

For more details please refer to the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 7.

The assets to be protected by the TOE are defined in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 3.1. Based on these assets the TOE Security Problem is defined in terms of

12 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Assumptions, Threats and Organisational Security Policies. This is outlined in the Security

Target [6] and [8], chapter 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4.

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

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 Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC

Dedicated Software

The following table outlines the TOE deliverables:

TOE deliverables for the TOE version V0A from SSMC with MIFARE MSO

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0A Release V0A (GDS 2 File:

T051A_20090820.gds2) in form of wafer, modules and packages. The dice include reference T051A.

Test ROM Software for MIFARE MSO (part of the IC Dedicated Test Software) Version 97,

December 9th, 2009, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_97_collected.ms3)

Boot ROM Software for MIFARE MSO (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software)

Version 97, December 9th, 2009, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_97_collected.ms3)

MIFARE Operating System MSO (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software) Version 97,

December 9th, 2009, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_97_collected.ms3)

Data Sheet P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, NXP Semiconductors, Rev. 3.5, Document Number 177935, 14 February 2012

Instruction Set, SmartMX-Family, Secure and PKI Smart Card Controller, Philips

Semiconductors, Revision 1.1, Document Number: 084111, July 04, 2006

Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/

P5Cx145, NXP Semiconductors, Version 1.8, Document Number: 185118, 18 December

2014

TOE deliverables for the TOE version V0A from SSMC with MIFARE FLeX

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0A Release V0A (GDS 2 File:

T051A_20090820.gds2) in form of wafer, modules and packages. The dice include reference T051A.

Test ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (the IC Dedicated Test Software) Version 102, April

27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Boot ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software)

Version 102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

13 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

MIFARE FLeX Operating System (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software) Version

102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Data Sheet P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, NXP Semiconductors, Rev. 3.5, Document Number 177935, 14 February 2012

Instruction Set, SmartMX-Family, Secure and PKI Smart Card Controller, Philips

Semiconductors, Revision 1.1, Document Number: 084111, July 04, 2006

Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/

P5Cx145, NXP Semiconductors, Version 1.8, Document Number: 185118, 18 December

2014

TOE deliverables for the TOE with release V0B from SSMC with MIFARE FLeX

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0B Release V0B (GDS 2 File:

T051B_20100617_C.gds2) in form of wafer, modules and packages. The dice include reference T051B.

Test ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (the IC Dedicated Test Software) Version 102, April

27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Boot ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software)

Version 102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

MIFARE FLeX Operating System (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software) Version

102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Data Sheet P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, NXP Semiconductors, Rev. 3.5, Document Number 177935, 14 February 2012

Instruction Set, SmartMX-Family, Secure and PKI Smart Card Controller, Philips

Semiconductors, Revision 1.1, Document Number: 084111, July 04, 2006

Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/

P5Cx145, NXP Semiconductors, Version 1.8, Document Number: 185118, 18 December

2014

TOE deliverables for the TOE with release V0B from Globalfoundries with MIFARE

FLeX

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0B Release V0B (GDS 2 File: s051B.gds2) in form of wafer, modules and packages. The dice include reference T051B.

Test ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (the IC Dedicated Test Software) Version 102, April

27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Boot ROM Software for MIFARE FLeX (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software)

Version 102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

MIFARE FLeX Operating System (part of the IC Dedicated Support Software) Version

102, April 27th, 2011, Test ROM on the chip (tmfos_102_collected.hex)

Data Sheet P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, NXP Semiconductors, Rev. 3.5, Document Number 177935, 14 February 2012

Instruction Set, SmartMX-Family, Secure and PKI Smart Card Controller, Philips

Semiconductors, Revision 1.1, Document Number: 084111, July 04, 2006

Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/

P5Cx145, NXP Semiconductors, Version 1.8, Document Number: 185118, 18 December

2014

Table 2: Deliverables of the TOE

Note that only 4 items (the hardware platform and three documents) are delivered since the IC Dedicated Software included in the ROM is delivered on the chip. There is one Data

14 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Sheet and one Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual for all configurations of the TOE.

All documents are deliverd in electronic form.

The TOE hardware is available in different package formats as listed in the third column of the next table. The following package types are supported in this evaluation:

Ux Ux Ux Ux Ux

Wafer not thinner than 50μm (The letter “x” in “Ux” stands for a capital letter or a number, which identifies the wafer type)

Xn Xn Xn Xn

Module (The letter “n” in “Xn” stands for a capital letter or a number, which identifies the module type)

A4

A6

Ai

A4

A6

Ai

MOB4 module

MOB6 module

Inlay (The letter ‘i” in “Ai” stands for a capital letter, which identifies both, the inlay type and the package type inside the inlay.)

Tabelle 3: Supported package types

The package type does not influence the security functionality of the TOE. The usable interfaces depend on the pads connected in the package and the chip configuration.

Therefore the package can be selected according to the purpose of the final product. Note that the security of the TOE is not dependent on which pad is connected or not - the connections just define how the product can be used.

The requirements for the delivery of the TOE are described in Chapter 2 of the Guidance,

Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/ P5Cx145.

For each delivery form NXP BU S&C offers two ways of delivery of the TOE:

1. The customer collects the product himself at the NXP BU S&C site.

2. The product is sent to the customer by NXP BU S&C with special protective measures.

These methods are also described in the Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP

Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/ P5Cx145, Chapter 2, as part of the requirements for delivery.

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:

As the TOE is a hardware security platform, the security policy of the TOE provides countermeasures against: leakage of information, physical probing, malfunctions, physical manipulations, access to code, access to data memory, abuse of functionality.

Hence the TOE shall:

15 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

• maintain the integrity and the confidentiality of data stored in the memory of the

TOE and 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:

Name Title

OE.Process-Sec-IC Protection during Packaging, Finishing and Personalization

OE.Plat-Appl

OE.Resp-Appl

OE.Check-Init

Usage of Hardware Platform

Treatment of User Data

Check of initialization data by the Security IC Embedded Software

Tabelle 4: Objectives for the TOE-Environment

Details can be found in the Security Target [6] and [8], chapter 4.2 and 4.3.

5.

Architectural Information

The hardware platform comprises the following components: 8-bit CPU, Special Function

Registers, Triple-DES coprocessor, AES coprocessor, FameXE coprocessor and a

Random Number Generator (RNG). Further on the hardware platform implements a contact-based interface and a contactless interface with power module including security sensors and filters. The CPU is equipped with a Memory Management Unit and provides different CPU Modes in order to support the separation of different applications running on the TOE. Security features for physical protection are realized within the layout of the whole circuitry.

The Special Function Registers provide an interface to the TOE security functionality that can be controlled by the Security IC Embedded Software. The NXP Secure Smart Card

Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0v/ V0B(s) provides different levels of access control to the Special Function Register with the different CPU Modes including configurable access control to Special Function Registers for the User Mode and the Mifare Mode.

The FameXE does not provide a cryptographic algorithm itself. The modular arithmetic functions are suitable to implement different asymmetric cryptographic algorithms.

The TOE executes the IC Dedicated Support Software (Boot Software) during the start up to configure and initialise the hardware. This software is executed in the Boot Mode. After the start-up is finished and the CPU Mode changed to System Mode it is not possible to re-enter the Boot Mode without forcing a reset.

The MIFARE Operating System supports the functions to exchange data in the contactless mode with other MIFARE components. The MIFARE Operating System is executed in the

MIFARE Mode to ensure a strict separation between IC Dedicated Support Software and

Security IC Embedded Software. Note, that the term MIFARE Operating System as being used in the Security Target refers to both, the MIFARE MSO and the MIFARE FLeX variant

16 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

available for the TOE. Based on the partitioning of the memories the MIFARE Operating

System is not able to access the Security IC Embedded Software and the data stored in the EEPROM area that is not reserved for the MIFARE Operating System. In the same way the access to the program and the data of the MIFARE Operating System is denied for the Security IC Embedded Software. A limited memory area for the data exchange

(between Security IC Embedded Software and MIFARE Operating System) can be configured by the Security IC Embedded Software.

The hardware platform comprises a contact based interface and a contactless interface.

Both interfaces can be used independent from each other. Depending on the major configuration the contactless interface is disabled, or configured as S2C interface. Based on a specific minor configuration and an associated clock configuration both interfaces could be used simultaneously.

6.

Documentation

The evaluated documentation as outlined in table 2 is being provided with the product to the customer. This documentation contains the required information for secure usage of the TOE in accordance with the Security Target.

Additional obligations and notes for secure usage of the TOE as outlined in chapter 10 of this report have to be followed.

7.

IT Product Testing

The tests performed by the developer can be divided into the following categories:

1. tests which are performed in a simulation environment with different tools for the analogue circuitries and for the digital parts of the TOE;

2. functional tests which are performed with special software

3. characterisation and verification tests to release the hardware platform for production including tests with different operating conditions as well as special verification tests for security services and security features of the hardware

4. functional tests at the end of the production process using IC Dedicated Test

Software. These tests are executed for every chip to check its correct functionality as last step of phase 3.

The developer tests cover all TSFIs as identified in the functional specification as well as in the test documentation.

The tests of the evaluators comprise special tests and examination of the hardware platform using open samples. In addition the evaluators perform tests of the hardware platform using different configurations.

For penetration testing the evaluators took all TOE Security Functionality into consideration. Extensive penetration testing was performed to test the security mechanisms used to provide the Security Services and Security Features. The tests for the hardware platform comprise the use of bespoke equipment and expert knowledge. The penetration tests considered both the physical tampering of the hardware platform including information that can be gathered by reverse engineering to support other attacks.

Further on attacks that do not modify the hardware platform physically such as side channel analysis for the coprocessors (AES, Triple-DES) and perturbation attacks were performed. The test of the hardware platform comprises attacks that must be averted by

17 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

the combination of the hardware platform and the Security IC Embedded Software as well as attacks against the hardware platform directly.

8.

Evaluated Configuration

This certification covers the following configurations of the TOE:

The NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145V0v/ V0B(s) can be delivered in different configurations, specifically it is delivered with different MIFARE versions. The term “MIFARE Operating System” denotes the TOE with MIFARE MSO or MIFARE FLeX option according to the ST. All configurations listed in the following table are covered by the evaluation. Due to the naming conventions of the SMX family the configured TOEs have different names.

P5CD145V0v P5CC145V0v P5CD128V0v P5CC128V0v P5CN145V0v

Contactless available not available available not available configured as

S2C interface interface

Mifare OS accessible

EEPROM available

144kByte not available

144kByte available

128kByte not available

128kByte not available

144kByte

Tabelle 5: Overview of major configurations

The P5CD145V0v/V0v(s) and its major configurations were all tested during the evaluation. All configurations are available to the evaluator. Beside the differences listed in table 5 there are no other differences between the configurations (note that the MIFARE

Operating System is only available for the configurations with either contact-less interface or S2C interface). The term “MIFARE Operating System” in this context according to the

ST, [6] covers both variants of the chip the MIFARE MSO option and the MIFARE FLeX option. Note, that according to the ST, the MSO option is no longer offered as variant of the TOE. This means that customers providing a new IC Security Embedded Software will get the MIFARE FleX variant. The configuration does not have dependencies to security features. Therefore the results described in this document are also applicable for the

P5CD128V0v/V0v(s), P5CC128V0v/V0v(s), P5CD145V0v/V0v(s), P5CC145V0v/V0v(s), and the P5CN145V0v/V0v(s).

9.

Results of the Evaluation

9.1. CC specific results

The Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) [9] was provided by the ITSEF according to the

Common Criteria [1], the Methodology [2], the requirements of the Scheme [3] and all interpretations and guidelines of the Scheme (AIS) [4] as relevant for the TOE.

The Evaluation Methodology CEM [2] was used for those components up to EAL5 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 5 and guidance specific for the technology of the product [4] (AIS 34).

The following guidance specific for the technology was used:

(i) The Application of CC to Integrated Circuits

(ii) Application of Attack Potential to Smartcards

18 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

(iii) Guidance, Smartcard Evaluation

(see [4], AIS 25, AIS 37).

For RNG assessment the scheme interpretations AIS 31 was used (see [4]).

To support composite evaluations according to AIS 36 the document ETR for composite evaluation [10] was provided and approved. This document provides details of this platform evaluation that have to be considered in the course of a composite evaluation on top.

As a result of the evaluation the verdict PASS is confirmed for the following assurance components:

All components of the EAL 5 package including the class ASE as defined in the CC (see also part C of this report)

The components ALC_DVS.2, ASE_TSS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 augmented for this TOE evaluation.

As the evaluation work performed for this certification procedure was carried out as a re-evaluation based on the certificate BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-2013, re-use of specific evaluation tasks was possible. The focus of this re-evaluation was on side channel analysis as well as fault analysis.

The evaluation has confirmed:

PP Conformance: Security IC Platform Protection Profile, Version 1.0, 15 June

2007, BSI-CC-PP-0035-2007 [7]

● for the Functionality: PP conformant plus product specific extensions

Common Criteria Part 2 extended

● for the Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant

EAL 5 augmented by ALC_DVS.2, ASE_TSS.2 and 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.

9.2. Results of cryptographic assessment

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).

Key Size in Bits No.

Purpose Cryptographic

Mechanism

Standard of

Implementation

1 Cryptographic

Primitives

2

Two-key TDES [FIPS-46-3] (DES)

Three-key TDES [FIPS-46-3] (DES)

|K| = 112

|K| = 168

Security Level above 100 Bits

no yes

19 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

No.

Purpose Cryptographic

Mechanism

AES

Standard of

Implementation

Key Size in Bits

[FIPS-197] (AES) |K| = 128, 192, 256

Security Level above 100 Bits

yes 3

Table 6: 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).

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 for 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.

Some security measures are partly implemented in the hardware and require additional configuration or control or measures to be implemented by the Security IC Embedded

Software.

For this reason the TOE includes guidance documentation (see table 2) which contains guidelines for the developer of the Security IC Embedded Software on how to securely use the microcontroller chip and which measures have to be implemented in the software in order to fulfil the security requirements of the Security Target of the TOE.

In the course of the evaluation of the composite product or system it must be examined if the required measures have been correctly and effectively implemented by the software.

Additionally, the evaluation of the composite product or system must also consider the evaluation results as outlined in the document ETR for composite evaluation [10].

11. Security Target

For the purpose of publishing, the Security Target [8] 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

AIS

Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme

AES

BSI

Advanced Encryption Standard

Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik / Federal Office for

Information Security, Bonn, Germany

20 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

BSIG

CCRA

CC

CEM cPP

CPU

DES

EAL

ETR

IC

IT

ITSEF

PP

RNG

ROM

S2C

SAR

SFP

SFR

ST

TOE

TSF

UART

BSI-Gesetz / Act on the Federal Office for Information Security

Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement

Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation

Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation

Collaborative Protection Profile

Central Processing Unit

Data Encryption Standard

Evaluation Assurance Level

Evaluation Technical Report

Integrated Circuit

Information Technology

Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility

Protection Profile

Random Number Generator

Read Only Memory

Smart card interface standard complying with ISO/IEC 18092

Security Assurance Requirement

Security Function Policy

Security Functional Requirement

Security Target

Target of Evaluation

TOE Security Functionality

Universal Asynchronous Receiver Transmitter

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

21 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

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.

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.

22 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

13. Bibliography

[1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,

Part 1: Introduction and general model, Revision 3, July 2009

Part 2: Security functional components, Revision 3, July 2009

Part 3: Security assurance components, Revision 3, July 2009

[2] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CEM),

Evaluation Methodology, Version 3.1, Rev. 3, July 2009

[3] BSI certification: Technical information on the IT security certification of products, protection profiles and sites (BSI 7138) and Requirements regarding the Evaluation

Facility for the Evaluation of Products, Protection Profiles and Sites under the CC and ITSEC (BSI 7125)

[4]

Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme (AIS) as relevant for the TOE 8 .

[5] German IT Security Certificates (BSI 7148), periodically updated list published also in the BSI Website

[6] Security Target BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-20152013, Version 2.1, 16 November 2012,

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128/P5Cx145 V0v/ V0B(s) Security

Target, NXP Semiconductors, Business Unit Identification (confidential document)

[7] Security IC Platform Protection Profile, Version 1.0, 15 June 2007,

BSI-CC-PP-0035-2007

[8] Security Target Lite BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015,Version 2.1, 16 November 2012,

NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers P5Cx128V0v/P5Cx145V0v(s) Security Target

Lite, NXP Semiconductors, Business Unit Identification (sanitised public document)

[9] Evaluation Technical Report, Version 1.9, March 31st, 2015, Evaluation Technical

Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2, T-Systems GEI GmbH, (confidential document)

[10] ETR for composite evaluation according to AIS 36, Version 1.3, January 27th, 2015,

ETR for composition, T-Systems GEI GmbH (confidential document)

[11] Configuration lists for the TOE:

Configuration List P5Cx128/P5Cx145 V0v/ V0B(s), NXP Semiconductors,

Business Unit Identification, Rev. 2.0, April 26th, 2013

8 specifically

AIS 25, Version 8, Anwendung der CC auf Integrierte Schaltungen including JIL Document and CC

Supporting Document

AIS 26, Version 9, Evaluationsmethodologie für in Hardware integrierte Schaltungen including JIL

Document and CC Supporting Document

AIS 31, Version 3, Funktionalitätsklassen und Evaluationsmethodologie für physikalische

Zufallszahlengeneratoren

AIS 34, Version 3, Evaluation Methodology for CC Assurance Classes for EAL 5+ (CCv2.3 &

CCv3.1) and EAL 6 (CCv3.1)

AIS 35, Version 2, Öffentliche Fassung des Security Targets (ST-Lite) including JIL Document and

CC Supporting Document and CCRA policies

AIS 38, Version 2, Reuse of evaluation results

23 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Configuration list for composite evaluation P5Cx128/P5Cx145 V0v/ V0B(s), NXP

Semiconductors, Business Unit Identification, Rev. 1.9, April 17th, 2013

Customer-Specific appendix of the Configuration List P5Cx128/P5Cx145 V0v/

V0B(s), NXP Semiconductors, Business Unit Identification, Rev. 1.8, April 17th,

2013

[12] Guidance documentation for the TOE:

Guidance, Delivery and Operation Manual, NXP Secure Smart Card Controllers

P5Cx128/ P5Cx145, NXP Semiconductors, Version 1.8, Document Number:

185118, 18 December 2014

Data Sheet P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family, Secure dual interface and contact PKI smart card controller, NXP Semiconductors, Rev. 3.5, Document Number

177935, 14 February 2012

Product Data Sheet Addendum Wafer Specification, P5Cx128/P5Cx145 family,

NXP Semiconductors, Business Unit Identification, Rev. 3.5, Document Number

184935, 26.04.2013

Instruction Set, SmartMX-Family, Secure and PKI Smart Card Controller, Philips

Semiconductors, Revision 1.1, Document Number: 084111, July 04, 2006

24 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

C.

Excerpts from the Criteria

CC Part 1:

Conformance Claim (chapter 10.4)

“The conformance claim indicates the source of the collection of requirements that is met by a PP or ST that passes its evaluation. This conformance claim contains a CC conformance claim that:

● describes the version of the CC to which the PP or ST claims conformance.

● describes the conformance to CC Part 2 (security functional requirements) as either:

CC Part 2 conformant - A PP or ST is CC Part 2 conformant if all SFRs in that

PP or ST are based only upon functional components in CC Part 2, or

CC Part 2 extended - A PP or ST is CC Part 2 extended if at least one SFR in that PP or ST is not based upon functional components in CC Part 2.

describes the conformance to CC Part 3 (security assurance requirements) as either:

CC Part 3 conformant - A PP or ST is CC Part 3 conformant if all SARs in that

PP or ST are based only upon assurance components in CC Part 3, or

CC Part 3 extended - A PP or ST is CC Part 3 extended if at least one SAR in that PP or ST is not based upon assurance components in CC Part 3.

Additionally, the conformance claim may include a statement made with respect to packages, in which case it consists of one of the following:

Package name Conformant - A PP or ST is conformant to a pre-defined package

(e.g. EAL) if:

– the SFRs of that PP or ST are identical to the SFRs in the package, or

– the SARs of that PP or ST are identical to the SARs in the package.

Package name Augmented - A PP or ST is an augmentation of a predefined package if:

– the SFRs of that PP or ST contain all SFRs in the package, but have at least one additional SFR or one SFR that is hierarchically higher than an SFR in the package.

– the SARs of that PP or ST contain all SARs in the package, but have at least one additional SAR or one SAR that is hierarchically higher than an SAR in the package.

Note that when a TOE is successfully evaluated to a given ST, any conformance claims of the ST also hold for the TOE. A TOE can therefore also be e.g. CC Part 2 conformant.

Finally, the conformance claim may also include two statements with respect to Protection

Profiles:

PP Conformant - A PP or TOE meets specific PP(s), which are listed as part of the conformance result.

Conformance Statement (Only for PPs) - This statement describes the manner in which PPs or STs must conform to this PP: strict or demonstrable. For more information on this Conformance Statement, see Annex D.”

25 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

CC Part 3:

Class APE: Protection Profile evaluation (chapter 10)

“Evaluating a PP is required to demonstrate that the PP is sound and internally consistent, and, if the PP is based on one or more other PPs or on packages, that the PP is a correct instantiation of these PPs and packages. These properties are necessary for the PP to be suitable for use as the basis for writing an ST or another PP.

Assurance Class Assurance Components

APE_INT.1 PP introduction

APE_CCL.1 Conformance claims

Class APE: Protection

Profile evaluation

APE_SPD.1 Security problem definition

APE_OBJ.1 Security objectives for the operational environment

APE_OBJ.2 Security objectives

APE_ECD.1 Extended components definition

APE_REQ.1 Stated security requirements

APE_REQ.2 Derived security requirements

APE: Protection Profile evaluation class decomposition”

Class ASE: Security Target evaluation (chapter 11)

“Evaluating an ST is required to demonstrate that the ST is sound and internally consistent, and, if the ST is based on one or more PPs or packages, that the ST is a correct instantiation of these PPs and packages. These properties are necessary for the

ST to be suitable for use as the basis for a TOE evaluation.”

Assurance Class Assurance Components

ASE_INT.1 ST introduction

ASE_CCL.1 Conformance claims

Class ASE: Security

Target evaluation

ASE_SPD.1 Security problem definition

ASE_OBJ.1 Security objectives for the operational environment

ASE_OBJ.2 Security objectives

ASE_ECD.1 Extended components definition

ASE_REQ.1 Stated security requirements

ASE_REQ.2 Derived security requirements

ASE_TSS.1 TOE summary specification

ASE_TSS.2 TOE summary specification with architectural design summary

ASE: Security Target evaluation class decomposition

26 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Security assurance components (chapter 7)

“The following Sections describe the constructs used in representing the assurance classes, families, and components.“

“Each assurance class contains at least one assurance family.”

“Each assurance family contains one or more assurance components.”

The following table shows the assurance class decomposition.

Assurance Class

ADV: Development

AGD:

Guidance documents

ALC: Life cycle support

Assurance Components

ADV_ARC.1 Security architecture description

ADV_FSP.1 Basic functional specification

ADV_FSP.2 Security-enforcing functional specification

ADV_FSP.3 Functional specification with complete summary

ADV_FSP.4 Complete functional specification

ADV_FSP.5 Complete semi-formal functional specification with additional error information

ADV_FSP.6 Complete semi-formal functional specification with additional formal specification

ADV_IMP.1 Implementation representation of the TSF

ADV_IMP.2 Implementation of the TSF

ADV_INT.1 Well-structured subset of TSF internals

ADV_INT.2 Well-structured internals

ADV_INT.3 Minimally complex internals

ADV_SPM.1 Formal TOE security policy model

ADV_TDS.1 Basic design

ADV_TDS.2 Architectural design

ADV_TDS.3 Basic modular design

ADV_TDS.4 Semiformal modular design

ADV_TDS.5 Complete semiformal modular design

ADV_TDS.6 Complete semiformal modular design with formal high-level design presentation

AGD_OPE.1 Operational user guidance

AGD_PRE.1 Preparative procedures

ALC_CMC.1 Labelling of the TOE

ALC_CMC.2 Use of a CM system

ALC_CMC.3 Authorisation controls

ALC_CMC.4 Production support, acceptance procedures and automation

ALC_CMC.5 Advanced support

ALC_CMS.1 TOE CM coverage

ALC_CMS.2 Parts of the TOE CM coverage

ALC_CMS.3 Implementation representation CM coverage

ALC_CMS.4 Problem tracking CM coverage

ALC_CMS.5 Development tools CM coverage

ALC_DEL.1 Delivery procedures

ALC_DVS.1 Identification of security measures

ALC_DVS.2 Sufficiency of security measures

ALC_FLR.1 Basic flaw remediation

ALC_FLR.2 Flaw reporting procedures

ALC_FLR.3 Systematic flaw remediation

ALC_LCD.1 Developer defined life-cycle model

27 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Assurance Class

ATE: Tests

AVA: Vulnerability assessment

Assurance Components

ALC_LCD.2 Measurable life-cycle model

ALC_TAT.1 Well-defined development tools

ALC_TAT.2 Compliance with implementation standards

ALC_TAT.3 Compliance with implementation standards - all parts

ATE_COV.1 Evidence of coverage

ATE_COV.2 Analysis of coverage

ATE_COV.3 Rigorous analysis of coverage

ATE_DPT.1 Testing: basic design

ATE_DPT.2 Testing: security enforcing modules

ATE_DPT.3 Testing: modular design

ATE_DPT.4 Testing: implementation representation

ATE_FUN.1 Functional testing

ATE_FUN.2 Ordered functional testing

ATE_IND.1 Independent testing – conformance

ATE_IND.2 Independent testing – sample

ATE_IND.3 Independent testing – complete

AVA_VAN.1 Vulnerability survey

AVA_VAN.2 Vulnerability analysis

AVA_VAN.3 Focused vulnerability analysis

AVA_VAN.4 Methodical vulnerability analysis

AVA_VAN.5 Advanced methodical vulnerability analysis

Assurance class decomposition

Evaluation assurance levels (chapter 8)

“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 8.1)

“Table 1 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 CC Part 3. More precisely, each EAL includes no more than one

28 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

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 augmented with extended assurance requirements.

Evaluation assurance level 1 (EAL 1) - functionally tested (chapter 8.3)

“Objectives

EAL 1 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.

EAL 1 requires only a limited security target. It is sufficient to simply state the SFRs that the TOE must meet, rather than deriving them from threats, OSPs and assumptions through security objectives.

EAL 1 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 EAL 1 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.”

Evaluation assurance level 2 (EAL 2) - structurally tested (chapter 8.4)

“Objectives

EAL 2 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 practise. As such it should not require a substantially increased investment of cost or time.

EAL 2 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 (EAL 3) - methodically tested and checked (chapter 8.5)

“Objectives

EAL 3 permits a conscientious developer to gain maximum assurance from positive security engineering at the design stage without substantial alteration of existing sound development practises.

29 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

EAL 3 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.”

Evaluation assurance level 4 (EAL 4) - methodically designed, tested, and reviewed

(chapter 8.6)

“Objectives

EAL 4 permits a developer to gain maximum assurance from positive security engineering based on good commercial development practises which, though rigorous, do not require substantial specialist knowledge, skills, and other resources. EAL 4 is the highest level at which it is likely to be economically feasible to retrofit to an existing product line.

EAL 4 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 (EAL 5) - semiformally designed and tested (chapter

8.7)

“Objectives

EAL 5 permits a developer to gain maximum assurance from security engineering based upon rigorous commercial development practises supported by moderate application of specialist security engineering techniques. Such a TOE will probably be designed and developed with the intent of achieving EAL 5 assurance. It is likely that the additional costs attributable to the EAL 5 requirements, relative to rigorous development without the application of specialised techniques, will not be large.

EAL 5 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 (EAL 6) - semiformally verified design and tested

(chapter 8.8)

“Objectives

EAL 6 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.

EAL 6 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 (EAL 7) - formally verified design and tested

(chapter 8.9)

“Objectives

EAL 7 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 EAL 7 is currently limited to TOEs with tightly focused security functionality that is amenable to extensive formal analysis.”

30 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Assurance

Class

Development

Guidance

Documents

Life cycle

Support

Security Target

Evaluation

ADV_ARC

ADV_FSP

ADV_IMP

ADV_INT

ADV_SPM

ADV_TDS

AGD_OPE

AGD_PRE

ALC_CMC

ALC_CMS

ALC_DEL

ALC_DVS

ALC_FLR

ALC_LCD

ALC_TAT

Assurance

Family

1

1

1

1

Assurance Components by

Evaluation Assurance Level

EAL 1 EAL 2 EAL 3 EAL 4 EAL 5 EAL 6 EAL 7

1

1

2

1

3

1

4

1

1

5

1

2

1

5

2

3

1

1

6

2

3

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

3

3

1

1

3

1

1

4

4

1

1

4

1

1

4

5

1

1

5

1

1

5

5

1

2

5

1

2

1

5

6

1

ASE_CCL 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

3

1

2

3

1

ASE_ECD 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Tests

ASE_INT

ASE_OBJ

ASR_REQ

ASE_SPD

ASE_TSS

ATE_COV

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

3

2

1

1

2

1

3

Vulnerability assessment

ATE_DPT

ATE_FUN

ATE_IND

AVA_VAN

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

3

3

1

2

4

3

2

2

5

4

2

3

5

Table 1: Evaluation assurance level summary”

31 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Class AVA: Vulnerability assessment (chapter 16)

“The AVA: Vulnerability assessment class addresses the possibility of exploitable vulnerabilities introduced in the development or the operation of the TOE.”

Vulnerability analysis (AVA_VAN) (chapter 16.1)

“Objectives

Vulnerability analysis is an assessment to determine whether potential vulnerabilities identified, during the evaluation of the development and anticipated operation of the TOE or by other methods (e.g. by flaw hypotheses or quantitative or statistical analysis of the security behaviour of the underlying security mechanisms), could allow attackers to violate the SFRs.

Vulnerability analysis deals with the threats that an attacker will be able to discover flaws that will allow unauthorised access to data and functionality, allow the ability to interfere with or alter the TSF, or interfere with the authorised capabilities of other users.”

32 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

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

Certification Report

33 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

This page is intentionally left blank.

34 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

Annex B of Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Evaluation results regarding development and production environment

The IT product NXP Secure PKI Smart Card Controllers P5CD128V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CC128V0v/ V0B(s), P5CD145V0v/ V0B(s), P5CC145V0v/ V0B(s),

P5CN145V0v/V0B(s), each including IC Dedicated Software (Target of Evaluation, TOE) has been evaluated at an approved evaluation facility using the Common Methodology for

IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1 extended by advice of the Certification Body for components beyond EAL 5 and guidance specific for the technology of the product for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.1.

As a result of the TOE certification, dated 27 April 2015, the following results regarding the development and production environment apply. The Common Criteria assurance requirements ALC – Life cycle support (i.e. ALC_CMC.4, ALC_CMS.5, ALC_DEL.1,

ALC_DVS.2, ALC_LCD.1, ALC_TAT.2) are fulfilled for the development and production sites of the TOE listed below:

The target of evaluation (TOE) is developed by:

NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH

Business Unit Security and Connectivity

Stresemannallee 101

D-22529 Hamburg

This site provides also customer support.

The evaluation deliverables are provided by:

NXP Semiconductors Germany GmbH

Business Unit Security and Connectivity

Stresemannallee 101

D-22529 Hamburg or

NXP Semiconductors (Thailand)

Assembly Plant Bangkok, Thailand (APB)

303 Moo 3 Chaengwattana Rd.

Laksi, Bangkok 10210 Thailand for the hardware platform and

NXP Semiconductors GmbH

Business Unit Security and Connectivity

Document Control Office

Mikron-Weg 1

A-8101 Gratkorn for the documentation of the TOE.

35 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

Following sites are involved for the production of the TOE wafer fab and associated mask shops:

Semiconductor Factory (chipfinishing and wafer production):

Systems on Silicon Manufacturing Co. Pte. Ltd. (SSMC)

70 Pasir Ris Drive 1

Singapore 519527

Singapore

Mask Shop for SSMC:

Toppan Photomasks Korea Ltd.

345-1, Sooha-Ri ShinDoon-Myon

467-840 Ichon

South Korea

Semiconductor Factory (chipfinishing):

GLOBALFOUNDRIES Singapore Pte Ltd.

60 Woodlands Industrial Park D, Street 2

Singapore, 738406

Semiconductor Factory (wafer production):

GLOBALFOUNDRIES Singapore (Tampines) Pte Ltd

1 Tampines Industrial Avenue 5

Singapore 528830

Mask Shop for Globalfoundries:

Photronics Singapore Pte. Ltd.

6 Loyang Industrial Park

Singapore 507099

Mask Shop for Globalfoundries:

Photronics Semiconductors Mask Corp. (PSMC)

1F, No.2, Li-Hsin Rd.

Science-Based Industrial Park

Hsin-Chu City

Taiwan R.O.C.

In addition, the following sites are involved for the bumping, testing, module inlay assembly of the TOE:

Wafer Bumping:

Chipbond Technology Corporation

No. 3, Li-Hsin Rd. V

Science Based Industrial Park

Hsin-Chu City

Taiwan R.O.C.

Test Centre:

NXP Semiconductors GmbH

IC Manufacturing Operations - Test Center Hamburg (IMO TeCH)

Stresemannallee 101

D-22529 Hamburg

Test Centre:

Assembly Plant Kaohsiung

NXP Semiconductors Taiwan Ltd

36 / 38

BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015 Certification Report

#10, Jing 5th Road, N.E.P.Z, Kaohsiung 81170

Taiwan, R.O.C

Test Center and Module Assembly:

NXP Semiconductors (Thailand)

Assembly Plant Bangkok, Thailand (APB)

303 Moo 3 Chaengwattana Rd.

Laksi, Bangkok 10210 Thailand

Module Assembly:

NedCard B.V.

Bijsterhuizen 25-29

6604 LM Wijchen

The Netherlands

Module Assembly:

Chipbond Technology Corporation

No. 1, Dàhuá 1st Rd.

Kaohsiung City

Taiwan 806, R.O.C.

Inlay assembly:

HID Global Galway

Paic Tionscail na Tulaigh

Balle na hAbhann

Co. Galway

Ireland

Inlay assembly:

Smartrac Technology Ltd.

142 Moo, Hi-Tech Industrial Estate

Tambon Ban Laean, Amphor Bang-Pa-In

13160 Ayutthaya

Thailand

Development:

NXP Semiconductors India Private Limited

Manyata Tech Park

Nagawara Village, Kasaba Hobli,

Bangalore 560 045

India

For the sites listed above, the requirements have been specifically applied in accordance with the Security Target [6]. 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 [6] and [8]) are fulfilled by the procedures of these sites.

37 / 38

Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0858-V2-2015

This page is intentionally left blank.

38 / 38

Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project