[Public Interpretations Database]

I-0338: Configuration Items In The Absence Of Explicit Scope

 
TYPE:                 NIAP Interpretation
NUMBER:               I-0338
STATUS:               Formally Superseded

TITLE:                Configuration Items In The Absence Of Explicit Scope
SUPERSEDED BY:        
     I-0412           Configuration Items In The Absence Of Configuration Management

EFFECTIVE:            2000-03-27
SUPERSEDED:           2001-06-22

SOURCE REFERENCE:     CC v2.1 Part 3 Subclause 8.2 ACM_CAP.2
RELATED TO:           <None>
CCIMB ENTRY:          CCIMB-INTERP-0099

STATEMENT

The following interprets the ACM_CAP.2 Component Developer Action Elements in contexts where no Configuration Management Scope (ACM_SCP Family) components are included in the PP/ST:

In environments where a protection profile or security target does not explicitly have a statement of the items to be under configuration management, the ACM_CAP.2.2D element does not apply.

RECOMMENDED CRITERIA CHANGES

This problem could be corrected in the following fashion:

  1. Delete ACM_CAP.2.2D.

  2. Change ACM_CAP.2.3D to refer to a "configuration list" instead of "CM documentation".

  3. Delete ACM_CAP.2.3C.

  4. Change ACM_CAP.2.5C to refer to the "configuration list" instead of "CM documentation".

  5. Change ACM_CAP.2.6C to refer to the "configuration list" instead of "the CM System".

Alternatively, ACM_CAP.2.D could be deleted, and ACM_CAP.2.6C could be changed to refer to "The CM documentation" instead of "The CM system".

If these changes are not made, an application note should be added to clarify the interpretation of ACM_CAP.2.2D when ACM_SCP is not included. The CEM should also be reviewed to determine any impact on the ACM_CAP work units for EAL2.

SUPPORT:

The new contents elements introduced for the ACM_CAP.2 component all deal with uniquely identifying all items that make up the TOE and having their descriptions in a configuration list. This configuration list is contained in the CM documentation, which is required by ACM_CAP.2.3D. However, in the absence of explicit scope, there are no requirements that configuration management be performed on any of these items.

This viewpoint is supported by the Common Evaluation Methodology v1.0, which in the methodology for EAL2, ACM_CAP.2, does not impose any evaluator actions with respect to verifying use or presence of a CM system. In fact, the EAL2 work unit for ACM_CAP.2.6C (the only content and presentation element to refer to a CM system) requires a check only on the configuration list, not the CM system.

The requirements of the CEM lead to the conclusion that the goal of ACM_CAP in the absence of ACM_SCP is to ensure that an unambiguous list of all configuration items that comprise the TOE be maintained, but not that there necessarily be a full blown CM system in place to manage changes to those components.