|
|
I-0392: AVA_MSU Does Not Mandate Extra Functions In The TOE |
TYPE: NIAP Interpretation NUMBER: I-0392 STATUS: Sent to CCEVS Management and CCIMB for Review TITLE: AVA_MSU Does Not Mandate Extra Functions In The TOE FIRST POST: [cc-cmt 00360] SOURCE REFERENCE: CC v2.1 Part 3 Subclause 14.2 AVA_MSU.1 RELATED TO: <None> CCIMB ENTRY: CCIMB-INTERP-0247 ISSUE:The AVA_MSU.1.3E element, as currently stated, is insolvable due to the word "all". Although the AVA_MSU.1.3E is not meant to mandate extra functions in the TOE, the current wording can easily be read to call for such functions in the TSF.STATEMENTThe evaluator is only required to determine that the guidance documentation is sufficient to allow detection of those insecure states detectable through either procedures or functions already available in the TOE.RECOMMENDED CRITERIA CHANGESTo address this interpretation, the following changes are made to CC v2.1 Part
3 (notation:
additions;
SUPPORT:This interpretation makes it clear that the detection of an insecure state is to be achieved through the use of functions already available in the TSF. This approach is ratified in the CEM wording. Paragraph 1223 in the CEM, for example, refers only to existing security features; there is no notion of needed additional features to ensure that every potential insecure state, no matter how unlikely, is detectable. |