NAP-14.6A, Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information Group Protection Profile
Establish requirements for the protection of National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) Unclassified Mandatory Protection information when information systems are used to collect, create, process, transmit, store, and disseminate this information.
Version history and related documents
Document text
Text extracted from the attached file. Refer to the original document for the authoritative version.
Section 1
NNSA Policy Letter: NAP 14.6-A
Date: April 5, 2006
TITLE: Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information Group Protection Profile
1. OBJECTIVE. Establish requirements for the protection of National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) Unclassified Mandatory Protection information when information
systems are used to collect, create, process, transmit, store, and disseminate this information.
2. APPLICABILITY. This NNSA Policy (NAP) applies to all entities, Federal or contractor,
which collect, create, process, transmit, store, and disseminate NNSA information.
a. NNSA Elements. NNSA Headquarters Organizations, Service Center, Site Offices,
NNSA contractors, and subcontractors are, hereafter, referred to as NNSA elements.
b. Information System. This NAP applies to any information system that collects, creates,
processes, transmits, stores, and disseminates unclassified or classified information for
NNSA. This NAP applies to any information system lifecycle, including the
development of new information systems, the incorporation of information systems into
an infrastructure, the incorporation of information systems outside the infrastructure, the
development of prototype information systems, the reconfiguration or upgrade of existing
systems, and legacy systems. In this document, the term(s) "information system," Target
of Evaluation (TOE), or "system" are used to mean any information system or network
that is used to collect, create, process, transmit, store, or disseminate data owned by, for,
or on behalf of NNSA or DOE.
c. Deviations. Deviations from the requirements prescribed in this NAP must be processed
in accordance with Chapter E of Attachment 1 to NAP-14.1-A, NNSA Cyber Security
Program.
d. Site/Facility Management Contractors. Except for the exclusions in paragraph 2.e, the
Contractor Requirements Document (CRD), Attachment 1, sets forth requirements of this
NAP that will apply to site/facility management contractors whose contract includes the
CRD.
(1) The CRD must be included in site/facility management contracts that provide access
to NNSA information systems and automated access to NNSA information.
(2) The CRD does not automatically apply to other than site/facility management
contractors. Any application of requirements of this Policy to other than site/facility
management contractors will be communicated separately.
NAP 14.6-A
2
(3) As the laws, regulations, and DOE and NNSA directives clause of site/facility
management contracts states, regardless of the performer of the work, site/facility
management contractors with the CRD incorporated into their contracts are
responsible for compliance with the requirements of the CRD.
(4) Affected site/facility management contractors are responsible for flowing down the
requirements of this CRD to subcontracts at any tier to the extent necessary to
ensure the site/facility management contractors’ compliance with the requirements.
(5) Contractors must not flow down requirements to subcontractors unnecessarily or
imprudently. That is, contractors will—
(a) Ensure that they and their subcontractors comply with the requirements of the
CRD; and
(b) Incur only costs that would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of
competitive business.
Section 2
e. Exclusion. The Deputy Administrator for Naval Reactors shall, in accordance with the
responsibilities and authorities assigned by Executive Order 12344 (set forth in Public
Law 106-65 of October 5, 1999 [50 U.S.C. 2406]) and to ensure consistency throughout
the joint Navy and DOE Organization of the Naval Reactors Propulsion Program,
implement and oversee all requirements and practices pertaining to this policy for
activities under the Deputy Administrator’s cognizance.
f. Implementation. A plan for the implementation of this NAP must be completed within 60
days after issuance of this NAP.
3. CANCELLATIONS. This NNSA Policy NAP-14.6-A, Unclassified Mandatory Protection
Information Group Protection Profile, replaces NNSA Policy NAP 14.6.
4. RESPONSIBILITIES. Roles and responsibilities for all activities in the NNSA PCSP are
described in NAP-14.1-A, NNSA Cyber Security Program.
5. REQUIREMENTS. Implement the Protection Profile (PP) in Appendix 1 of Attachment 1
for protecting NNSA information in the Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information
Group and the information systems used to collect, create, process, transmit, store, and
disseminate this information.
6. CONTACT. Questions concerning this NAP should be directed to the NNSA Cyber Security
Program Manager, through the cognizant Cyber Security Office Manager, at 301-903-2425.
7. DEFINITIONS. See NAP 14.1-A, Attachment 3.
NAP 14.6-A
3
BY ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATOR:
Linton Brooks
Administrator
Attachments
NAP 14.6-A
4
This page intentionally blank.
NAP 14.6-A
ATTACHMENT 1-1
ATTACHMENT 1
CONTRACTOR REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT
This Contractor Requirements Document (CRD) establishes the requirements for National
Nuclear Security Administration contractors, with access to NNSA and DOE information
systems. Contractors must comply with the requirements listed in the CRD.
The contractor will ensure that it and its subcontractors cost-effectively comply with the
requirements of this CRD.
Regardless of the performer of the work, the contractor is responsible for complying with and
flowing down the requirements of this CRD to subcontractors at any tier to the extent necessary
to ensure the contractor’s compliance with the requirements. In doing so, the contractor must not
unnecessarily or imprudently flow down requirements to subcontractors. That is, the contractor
will ensure that it and its subcontractors comply with the requirements of this CRD and incur
only those costs that would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive
business.
REQUIREMENTS.
1. A plan for the implementation of this CRD must be completed within 60 days after inclusion
of this CRD in the contract.
2. The contractor shall implement the Protection Profile (PP) in Appendix 1 for protecting
NNSA information in the Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information Group and the
information systems used to collect, create, process, transmit, store, and disseminate this
information.
3. The contractor shall implement the deviations provisions listed in Chapter E of Attachment 1
to NAP 14.1-A, NNSA Cyber Security Program, to deviate from the requirements of this
CRD.
NAP 14.6-A
ATTACHMENT 1-2
This page intentionally blank.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
APPENDIX 1
National Nuclear Security Administration
PROTECTION PROFILE
FOR THE
UNCLASSIFIED
MANDATORY
PROTECTION
INFORMATION GROUP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
Section 3
ii
Version Revision Date Description/ Change
1.0 03/31/03 Version 1.0 – Initial Release
1.1 09/15/04 Corrected errors in formatting and added SFR/SAR
1.2 11/01/04 Modified for consistency with NNSA Threat Statement and NNSA Risk Assessment
1.3 08/01/05 Minor changes in numbering and text
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
iii
Foreword
This publication, “NNSA Protection Profile for Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information,”
is issued by the Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration as part its
Program Secretarial Office Cyber Security Program to promulgate protection standards for
information.
The base set of requirements used in this protection profile is taken from the “Common Criteria
for Information Technology Security Evaluations, Version 2.0.” Further information about the
Common Criteria can be found on the Internet at http://niap.nist.gov/cc-scheme/index.html.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
iv
Table of Contents
1. PP INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 PP IDENTIFICATION.............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 PP OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 STRENGTH OF ENVIRONMENT .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 CONVENTIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.5 TERMS.................................................................................................................................................................. 2
2. TOE DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................................................. 2
3. TOE SECURITY ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................................................... 3
3.1 ASSUMPTIONS ...................................................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.1 Physical Assumptions................................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.2 Personnel Assumptions................................................................................................................................ 3
3.1.3 Connectivity Assumptions............................................................................................................................ 4
3.2 THREATS.............................................................................................................................................................. 4
3.2.1 TOE Threats................................................................................................................................................. 4
3.2.2 Non-TOE Threats......................................................................................................................................... 7
Section 4
3.3 ORGANIZATIONAL SECURITY POLICIES.............................................................................................................. 10
4. SECURITY OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................. 14
4.1 SECURITY OBJECTIVES FOR THE TOE................................................................................................................ 14
4.2 SECURITY OBJECTIVES FOR THE ENVIRONMENT................................................................................................ 18
5. IT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 23
5.1 TOE SECURITY FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................. 23
5.1.1 FAU_ARP.1 Security alarms..................................................................................................................... 23
5.1.2 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation........................................................................................................... 24
5.1.3 FAU_GEN.2 User identity association...................................................................................................... 25
5.1.4 FAU_SAA.4 Complex attack heuristics ..................................................................................................... 25
5.1.5 FAU_SAR.1 Audit review........................................................................................................................... 26
5.1.6 FAU_SAR.2 Restricted audit review.......................................................................................................... 26
5.1.7 FAU_SAR.3 Selectable audit review.......................................................................................................... 26
5.1.8 FAU_SEL.1 Selective Audit ....................................................................................................................... 26
5.1.9 FAU_STG.2 Guarantees of audit data availability................................................................................... 27
5.1.10 FAU_STG.3 Action in case of possible audit data loss........................................................................... 27
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
v
Section 5
5.1.11 FAU_STG.4 Prevention of audit data loss............................................................................................... 27
5.1.12 FCS_CKM.4 Cryptographic key destruction........................................................................................... 28
5.1.13 FCS_COP.1 Cryptographic operation .................................................................................................... 28
5.1.14 FDP_ACC.2 Complete access control..................................................................................................... 28
5.1.15 FDP_ACF.1 Security attribute based access control.............................................................................. 29
5.1.16 FDP_DAU.1 Basic data authentication................................................................................................... 30
5.1.17 FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control........................................................................................... 30
5.1.18 FDP_IFF.1 Simple security attributes..................................................................................................... 31
5.1.19 FDP_ITC.1 Import of user data without security attributes.................................................................... 31
5.1.20 FDP_RIP.1 Subset residual information protection................................................................................ 31
5.1.21 FDP_SDI.2 Stored data integrity monitoring and action........................................................................ 32
5.1.22 FIA_AFL.1 Authentication failure handling ............................................................................................ 32
5.1.23 FIA_ATD.1 User attribute definition....................................................................................................... 32
5.1.24 FIA_SOS.1 Verification of secrets ........................................................................................................... 33
5.1.25 FIA_UAU.1 Timing of authentication...................................................................................................... 33
5.1.26 FIA_UAU.7 Protected authentication feedback ...................................................................................... 34
5.1.27 FIA_UID.1 Timing of identification ........................................................................................................ 34
5.1.28 FIA_USB.1 User-subject binding ............................................................................................................ 34
5.1.29 FIA_USB.1 User-subject binding ............................................................................................................ 35
5.1.30 FMT_MOF.1 Management of security functions behavior...................................................................... 35
5.1.31 FMT_MSA.1 Management of security attributes..................................................................................... 35
5.1.32 FMT_MSA.2 Secure security attributes ................................................................................................... 36
5.1.33 FMT_MSA.3 Static attribute initialization............................................................................................... 36
5.1.34 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data.................................................................................................. 36
Section 6
5.1.35 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data.................................................................................................. 36
5.1.36 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data .................................................................................................. 37
5.1.37 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data.................................................................................................. 37
5.1.38 FMT_REV.1 Revocation .......................................................................................................................... 37
5.1.39 FMT_REV.1 Revocation .......................................................................................................................... 38
5.1.40 FMT_REV.1 Revocation .......................................................................................................................... 38
5.1.41 FMT_SMR.2 Restrictions on security roles ............................................................................................. 38
5.1.42 FPT_AMT.1 Abstract machine testing..................................................................................................... 39
5.1.43 FPT_ITC.1 Inter-TSF confidentiality during transmission..................................................................... 39
5.1.45 FPT_RVM.1 Non-bypassability of the TSP.............................................................................................. 40
5.1.46 FPT_SEP.2 SFP domain separation........................................................................................................ 40
5.1.47 FPT_STM.1 Reliable time stamps............................................................................................................ 41
5.1.48 FPT_TST.1 TSF testing............................................................................................................................ 41
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
vi
5.1.49 FRU_RSA.1 Maximum quotas................................................................................................................. 41
5.1.50 FTA_MCS.1 Basic limitation on multiple concurrent sessions............................................................... 41
5.1.51 FTA_SSL.1 TSF-initiated session locking................................................................................................ 41
5.1.52 FTA_SSL.2 User-initiated locking ........................................................................................................... 42
5.1.53 FTA_TAB.1 Default TOE access banners................................................................................................ 42
5.1.54 FTA_TAH.1 TOE access history.............................................................................................................. 42
5.1.55 FTA_TSE.1 TOE session establishment................................................................................................... 43
5.1.56 FTP_TRP.1 Trusted Path......................................................................................................................... 43
Section 7
5.2 TOE SECURITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................................... 43
5.2.1 Configuration Management ....................................................................................................................... 43
5.2.2 Delivery and Operation ............................................................................................................................. 44
5.2.3 Development .............................................................................................................................................. 45
5.2.4 Guidance Documents ................................................................................................................................. 47
5.2.5 Life Cycle Support ..................................................................................................................................... 49
5.2.6 Tests ........................................................................................................................................................... 50
5.2.7 Vulnerability Assessment ........................................................................................................................... 51
5.3 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE IT ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................... 53
5.3.1 ENV_AMA.1 Malicious Access.................................................................................................................. 53
5.3.2 ENV_AVA.1 Information Availability........................................................................................................ 53
5.3.3 ENV_ATH.1 Management of User Identifiers and Authenticators............................................................ 54
5.3.4 ENV_CLR.1 Clearing ................................................................................................................................ 54
5.3.5 ENV_EXM.1 Hardware and Software Examination.................................................................................. 54
5.3.6 ENV_FOR.1 Forensics .............................................................................................................................. 54
5.3.7 ENV_IDS.1Intrusion Detection.................................................................................................................. 55
5.3.8 ENV_INT.1 TOE Interface......................................................................................................................... 55
5.3.9 ENV_MRK.1 Marking................................................................................................................................ 55
5.3.10 ENV_NON.1 Non-TOE Access ................................................................................................................ 56
5.3.11 ENV_NOT.1 User Notification ................................................................................................................ 56
5.3.12 ENV_NTK.1 Need-To-Know.................................................................................................................... 56
5.3.13 ENV_PHY.2 Physical Security and Physical Access............................................................................... 56
5.3.14 ENV_PRO.1 Information Protection ....................................................................................................... 57
5.3.15 ENV_RCV.1 System Recovery................................................................................................................. 57
5.3.16 ENV_REV.1 Media and Component Review............................................................................................ 57
5.3.17 ENV_RGT.1 User Access Rights and Privileges ..................................................................................... 57
5.3.18 ENV_ROL.1 Security Roles ..................................................................................................................... 57
5.3.19 ENV_TNG.1 User Training..................................................................................................................... 58
Section 8
6. PP APPLICATION NOTES................................................................................................................................. 58
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
vii
7. RATIONALE......................................................................................................................................................... 59
7.1 SECURITY OBJECTIVES RATIONALE................................................................................................................... 59
7.2 SECURITY REQUIREMENTS RATIONALE............................................................................................................. 74
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
1
1. PP Introduction
This Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information Group1 Protection Profile, hereafter called
MANDPP, specifies a set of security functional and assurance requirements for the NNSA
Unclassified Mandatory Protected Information Group and the Information Technology (IT)
products used to create, store, process, disseminate information in this Information Group.
This section contains document management and overview information necessary to describe the
Protection Profile (PP) for use in the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The PP
identification provides the labeling and descriptive information necessary to identify, catalogue,
register, and cross-reference a PP. The PP overview summarizes the profile in narrative form and
provides sufficient information for a potential user to determine whether the PP is of interest.
The overview can also be used as a standalone abstract for PP catalogues and registers. The
conventions section provides an explanation of how this document is organized and the terms
section gives a basic definition of terms that are specific to this PP.
1.1 PP Identification
Title: NNSA Protection Profile for Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information (MANDPP)
Keywords: access control, discretionary access control, general-purpose operating system,
information protection
1.2 PP Overview
Environments, systems and products conforming to the MANDPP support access controls that
are capable of enforcing access limitations on individual users and data objects. MANDPP
compliant systems also provide an audit capability that records the security-relevant events that
occur within the system.
The MANDPP provides for a level of protection that is appropriate for an assumed non-hostile
and well-managed user community requiring protection against threats of inadvertent or casual
attempts to breach the system security. The profile is not intended to be applicable to
circumstances in which protection is required against determined attempts by hostile and well-
funded attackers to breach system security. The MANDPP does not fully address the threats
posed by malicious system development or administrative personnel. These threats must be
mitigated by other technical and non-technical measures.
The MANDPP is generally applicable to distributed systems but does not address the security
requirements that arise specifically out of the need to distribute the resources within a network.
Section 9
1 Unclassified Mandatory Protection -- Unclassified information requiring protection mandated by policy, laws, such as Privacy Act
information; Agreements between Department of Energy (DOE), NNSA, its contractors, and other entities such as commercial
organizations or foreign governments; Proprietary information (but not third party proprietary); Unclassified Controlled Nuclear
Information (UCNI); Export-controlled information (ECI); Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information (NNPI); Military/ dual use
information (such as the Critical Military Technology and Materials list identified by DoD); Nonproliferation information; and
Information exempt from the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA),
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
2
1.3 Strength of Environment
The strength of environment is based on the NNSA Consequences of Loss minimums defined in
the NNSA PCPS and the threats from the NNSA Cyber Risk Assessment. The assurance
requirements and the minimum strength of function were chosen to be consistent with that level
of risk.
The assurance level for MANDPP is NNSA AL 2 and the minimum strength of function is SOF-
medium.
1.4 Conventions
This document is organized based on Annex B of Part 1 of the Common Criteria. For each
component, an application note may appear. Application notes document guidance for how the
requirement is expected to be applied. For additional guidance, the CC itself should be consulted.
1.5 Terms
This profile uses the following terms that are described in this section to aid in the application of
the requirements:
• User
• Authenticated User
• Administrator
• Discretionary Access Control
(DAC) Policy
• Access
• Authorization
• Category
A user is an individual who attempts to invoke a service offered by the TOE. An authenticated
user is a user who has been properly identified and authenticated. These users are considered to
be legitimate users of the TOE.
An administrator is an authenticated user who has been granted the authority to manage the TOE.
These users are expected to use this authority only in the manner prescribed by the guidance
given them.
2. TOE DESCRIPTION
The MANDPP defines a set of security requirements to be levied on Targets of Evaluation
(TOEs) containing the Unclassified Mandatory Protection Information Group. These TOEs
include information systems that are personal electronic devices, portable computers, and
systems containing general-purpose operating systems, such as workstations, mainframes, or
personal computers. These systems can be comprised of a single host or a set of cooperating
hosts in a distributed system. Such systems permit one or more processors along with peripherals
and storage devices to be used by single or multiple users to perform a variety of functions
requiring access to the information stored on the system.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
3
The MANDPP is applicable to TOEs that provide facilities for on-line interaction with users, as
well as TOEs that provide for batch processing. The protection profile is also generally
applicable to TOEs incorporating network functions but contains no network specific
requirements. Networking is covered only to the extent to which the TOE can be considered to
be part of a centrally managed system that meets a common set of security requirements.
Section 10
The MANDPP assumes that responsibility for the safeguarding of the data protected by the
TOEs security functions (TSF) can be delegated to the TOE users. All data is under the control
of the TOE. The data are stored in objects, and the TSF can associate a description of access
rights with each controlled object.
All individual users are assigned a unique identifier. This identifier supports individual
accountability. Activities of all users of the TOE are subject to monitoring.
The TSF authenticates the claimed identity of the user before allowing the user to perform any
actions that require TSF mediation, other than actions that aid an authenticated user in gaining
access to the TOE.
3. TOE Security Environment
3.1 Assumptions
This section describes the security aspects of the environment in which the TOE will be, or is
intended to be used. This includes information about the physical, personnel, and connectivity
aspects of the environment.
A MANDPP-conformant TOE is assured to provide effective security measures in a cooperative
non-hostile environment only if it is installed, managed, and used correctly. The operational
environment must be managed in accordance with assurance requirements documentation for
delivery, operation, and user/administrator guidance. The following specific conditions are
assumed to exist in an environment where MANDPP-conformant TOEs are employed.
3.1.1 Physical Assumptions
MANDPP-conformant TOEs are intended for application in user areas that have physical control
and monitoring. It is assumed that the following physical conditions will exist:
A.LOCATE The processing resources of the TOE will be located within
controlled access facilities that will prevent unauthorized
physical access.
A.PROTECT The TOE hardware and software critical to security policy
enforcement will be protected from unauthorized physical
modification.
3.1.2 Personnel Assumptions
It is assumed that the following personnel conditions will exist:
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
4
A.MANAGE There will be one or more competent individuals assigned to
manage the TOE and the security of the information it
contains.
A.TRAINED_ADM The system administrative personnel will follow and abide by
the instructions provided by the administrator documentation.
A.COOP Users possess the necessary authorization to access at least
some of the information managed by the TOE and most users
are expected to act in a benign manner.
3.1.3 Connectivity Assumptions
The MANDPP contains no explicit network or distributed system requirements. However, it is
assumed that the following connectivity conditions exist:
A.PEER Any other systems with which the TOE communicates are
assumed to be under the same management control and operate
under the same security policy constraints or that the TOE is
isolated by appropriate barriers, such as controlled interfaces,
firewalls, etc. PP-conformant TOEs are applicable to
networked or distributed environments only if the entire
network operates under the same constraints and resides within
a single management domain. There are no security
requirements that address connectivity to external systems or
the communications links to such systems. A Controlled
Interface may be necessary to preserve this assumption.
A.CONNECT All connections to peripheral devices reside within the
controlled access facilities. PP-conformant TOEs only address
security concerns related to the manipulation of the TOE
through its authorized access points. Internal communication
paths to access points such as terminals are assumed to be
adequately protected.
Section 11
3.2 Threats
These threats are addressed MANDPP compliant TOEs. The threat agents are either human users
or external IT entities not authorized to use the TOE itself. The asset that is subject to attack is
the information residing on the TOE itself.
3.2.1 TOE Threats
T.ABUSE_ADMIN System administrator abuse of privileges
T.ABUSE_OTHER Compromise by authorized activities
T.ABUSE_USER Abuse of authorized user privileges
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
5
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS Unauthorized access by an authenticated user for malicious
purposes
T.ACCESS_TOE Unauthorized access by authorized user
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED Undetected perpetrator access
T.ADMIN_ERROR System administrator error or omission
T.ATTACK_OTHER Unauthorized action by perpetrator
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_TOE
Loss of audit trail confidentiality
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE Corruption of audit trail
T.AUTHENTICATION_NETWORK
Unauthenticated communications between client and server
T.CAPTURE Eavesdropping
T.CONFIGURATION_ADMIN Inadequate configuration management
T.COVERT_OTHER Covert channel use
T.CRASH System crash
T.DELETE_UNINTENTIONAL Unintentional user deletion or destruction
T.DENY_OTHER Denial of participation in information transfer
T.EAVESDROPPING Unauthorized monitoring of networks or information
systems
T.ENTRY_OTHER Inappropriate access by authorized user
T.ENTRY_TOE Attack by unauthorized malicious user
T.ERROR_USER User errors
T.EXPORT_OTHER Improper export of data
T.FLAWED_CODE Flawed or incorrectly implemented software
T.FLAW_USER Exploitation of known flaws
T.IMPERSON_OTHER Impersonation of authorized user
T.INSTALL Insecure delivery or installation
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
6
T.INTEGRITY_OTHER Compromise of data integrity
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
Intentional disclosure of data or software
T.LINK_OTHER Analysis of observed activity
T.LOSS_SOFTWARE Unintentional loss of software or application
T.MALICIOUS_CODE Malicious code
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER
Masquerade of authorized user
T.MODIFY_OTHER Unauthorized modification or destruction of data
T.NON_REPUDIATION_RECEIVE
Repudiation by authorized receiver
T.NON_REPUDIATION_SEND
Repudiation by authorized sender
T.NON_REPUDIATION_TRANSACTION
Repudiation of authorized transaction
T.OBSERVE_OTHER Unauthorized observation of legitimate activities
T.OBSERVE_TOE Misplaced/incorrect belief in secure operation
T.OPERATE Improper operation of system
T.PHYSICAL Unauthorized hardware change
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK Physical attack on system components and data
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE Failure to record security significant events
T.REPLAY Replay
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE
Intentional damage to data or system software
T.SECRET_OTHER Exposure of data to authorized user without need-to-know
T.SIGNAL_SYSTEM_DEVELOPER
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
7
Emanations
T.SOCIAL_ENGINEERING Social engineering attacks
T.SPOOFING Spoofing of user identities, system components, and data
T.SPRINGBOARD Use of information system to mount attacks on other
systems
T.STEGANOGRAPHY Steganographic exfiltration
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED Intentional corruption of the system security state to enable
future insecurities
T.TAMPER Tampering with protection relevant system components
T.TOE_CORRUPTED Corruption of system security status
T.TRACEABLE_TOE Unable to trace events to users or processes
Section 12
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN
Benign trapdoor installed by system administrator
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_CODE
Malicious trapdoor provided by developer
T.UNAUTHORIZED_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
Unauthorized malicious software installed by user
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
Unintentional disclosure of data or software
T.UNINTENTIONAL_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
Unintentional malicious software installed by user
3.2.2 Non-TOE Threats
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS Unauthorized access by an authenticated user for malicious
purposes
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL Unauthorized access by authenticated user through non-
technical means
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
8
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE Unauthorized access by authenticated user through other
assets
T.ADMIN_ERROR System administrator error or omission
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_NON_TOE
Unauthorized disclosure of non-TOE audit trails
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_NON_TOE
Corruption of other system/ network and manual audit
trails
T.CAPTURE Eavesdropping
T.CRASH System crash
T.EAVESDROPPING Unauthorized monitoring of networks or information
systems
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL Unauthenticated user gains access through non-technical
means
T.ENTRY_NON_TOE Unauthenticated user gains unauthorized access to other
assets
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED Unauthenticated user gains access to other assets
T.EXPORT_OTHER Improper export of data
T.IMPERSON_OTHER Impersonation of authorized user
T.INSTALL Insecure delivery or installation
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
Intentional disclosure of data or software
T.LINK_OTHER Analysis of observed activity
T.LOSS_SOFTWARE Unintentional loss of software or application
T.MAINTENANCE Poor Maintenance
T.MALICIOUS_CODE Malicious code
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER
Masquerade of authorized user
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
9
T.MODIFY_OTHER Unauthorized modification or destruction of data
T.OBSERVE_NON_TOE Misplaced/incorrect belief in secure operation of the
security support structure
T.OBSERVE_OTHER Unauthorized observation of legitimate activities
T.OPERATE Improper operation of system
T.PHYSICAL Unauthorized hardware change
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK Physical attack on system components and data
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE
Failure to record security significant events on other assets
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE
Intentional damage to data or system software
T.SIGNAL_SYSTEM_DEVELOPER
Emanations
T.SOCIAL_ENGINEERING Social engineering attacks
T.SPOOFING Spoofing of user identities, system components, and data
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED Intentional corruption of the system security state to enable
future insecurities
T.TAMPER Tampering with protection relevant system components
T.TOE_CORRUPTED Corruption of system security status
T.TRACEBALE_NON_TOE Unable to trace events to other systems users or
environmental causes
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN
Benign trapdoor installed by system administrator
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
Unintentional disclosure of data or software
T.UNINTENTIONAL_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
Unintentional malicious software installed by user
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
10
3.3 Organizational Security Policies
P.ACCOUNTABILITY Users are held accountable for their actions, and actions taken
on their behalf, on the information system.
P.ALT_INFRASTRUCT
Information system users have, based on mission need,
continuing access to the information system hardware and
software assets.
Section 13
P.AUTH_MGMT The process of generating, issuing, and using authenticators is
managed in accordance with NNSA and site policies.
P.COMPOSITION The security of an information system or network composed of
individual information systems is equal to or greater than that
of any individual system in the combined system.
P.CONFIG_MGMT Protection features of a system are maintained during
development, modification, and maintenance of the hardware,
firmware, and software components.
P.CONOPS Continuity of operations planning is applied to applications,
data, and information systems.
P.CREDENTIAL_PROTECTION
Authentication credentials shall be protected to prevent
unauthorized access, modification or destruction. This policy
requires that the individuals and IT entities that use the
credentials adequately protect all credentials. The information
system supports this policy by restricting access to credentials,
by protecting the credentials as they are transmitted over the
network during the domain authentication process, and through
the trusted path between the credential reader and other
information system components.
P.CRYPTOGRAPHY Cryptographic services that are used to ensure information
confidentiality, privacy or integrity shall meet the criteria of the
appropriate robustness (strength of mechanism and assurance)
based on the value of information to be protected and the threat
environment.
P.DATA_ASSURANCE Modification of data is permitted only by authorized personnel.
P.DATA_AVAILABILITY
User and information system data are available, or restorable,
to meet mission availability requirements
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
11
P.DENY_ACCESS System resources are controlled to ensure access to information
sources cannot be denied to authorized users.
P.DUE_CARE The information and information system resources are
implemented and operated in a manner that represents due care
and diligence with respect to risks to the information and the
organization.
P.FILE_REVIEW An automated or administrative classification and sensitivity
review is performed on all electronic communications and files
that are to be electronically transmitted either beyond the
system boundary or to an interconnected system that is not
under the same management control and operating under the
same security policy constraints before release.
P.FORENSICS Information needed for penetration reconstruction, and
analyzing on-going or past cyber attacks and failures is
identified, collected, and preserved in accordance with NNSA
and site policies.
P.IDS The information system is protected from unauthorized
attempts to attack or penetrate the information system.
P.INFO_FLOW Information flow between information system components is
controlled in accordance with established information flow
policies.
P.KNOWN All NNSA multi-user information systems, desktops, and
laptops– excluding those information systems intended to
provide public access (e. g., public web servers)– must have,
and use, a mechanism that authenticates the identity of each
person before providing access to any information system,
application, service or resource.
P.LEAST_PRIV Privileges granted to information system users (including
privileged users) are the most restrictive (least privilege) set of
privileges needed for the performance of authorized tasks.
P.MALICIOUS_CODE The information system is protected from hardware, software,
and firmware designed to adversely impact the confidentiality,
integrity, and availability of the system and information assets.
Section 14
P.MEDIA_MARKING All removable media components of the information system
and output inside the system boundary are appropriately
marked with the level and category of the highest information
sensitivity of information that the system is accredited to
operate; or marked in accordance with a classification review
or information sensitivity review by authorized personnel.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
12
P.MEDIA_REVIEW All media (paper, disks, zip drives, removable disk drives, etc.)
are reviewed for classification and sensitivity and properly
marked before release outside the system boundary.
P.MONITORING All users’ activities, and activities on behalf of the user, are
monitored and reviewed for activities that are detrimental to
the confidentiality, integrity or availability of the information
or information system.
P.NTK Access to data in information system resources is limited to
users with the need-to-know for the information, regardless of
the form of the information. Access rights to specific data
objects are determined by object attributes assigned to that
object, user identity, user attributes, and environmental
conditions as defined by the security policy.
P.PERSONNEL All users (including privileged users) are cleared, or have
appropriate background reviews, according to NNSA and DOE
policies, for the highest level of information sensitivity, have
formal access approval for, and an authorized need-to-know
for, the information to which he/she is allowed access.
P.PHYSICAL The information and information system resources (including
media) are physically protected according to the sensitivity of
the information processed, stored, or transmitted by the
components.
P.PROTCTD_DOMAIN
The information system security functions maintain a separate
protected security domain for their own execution. The
components necessary for enforcing the security policies of the
information system security functions shall maintain a security
domain for their own execution that protects them from
interference and tampering by other system activities and users.
P.RESIDUAL_DATA All internal information system resources are cleared before
reallocation of the resource to a different user.
P.RISKASSESS Identification of system and environment vulnerabilities and an
assessment of their impact on the system’s security is regularly
performed.
P.ROLE_SEPARATION
Security roles and responsibilities are distributed to preclude
any one individual from adversely affecting operations or the
integrity of the system.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
13
P.SESSION_CTL User access to a system is determined by the authenticated
user’s access profile.
P.STRONG_AUTHENTICATION
All users shall be authenticated by two- factor strong
authentication mechanisms prior to being granted access to
systems and the information and resources managed by those
systems.
P.SURVIVE The system in conjunction with its environment must be
resilient to insecurity, resisting the insecurity and/ or providing
the means to detect an insecurity and recover from it.
P.SYS_ASSURANCE The information system’s security policy is maintained in the
environment of distributed systems even if the systems are
interconnected via an insecure networking medium (wire-lines,
fiber, Internet, wireless, etc.).
P.SYS_RECOVERY Controlled or trusted secure system recovery occurs in the
event of an information system failure.
Section 15
P.SYS_TESTING Certification and post-accreditation testing is applied to the
information system in accordance with PCSP and DAA
requirements.
P.TRAINING All users are trained to understand applicable system- use
policies, the proper use of systems and the vulnerabilities
inherent to those systems. This policy ensures that all users are
properly instructed on policies and procedures for using the
system, as well as, being able to acknowledge all threats and
vulnerabilities that may impact system processing.
P.TRUSTED_USER All users shall abide by designated policies and the conduct
stated by those policies. In this context, 'users' includes both
users of systems that interface with the TOE, and the
administrators of systems that interface with the TOE in
addition to the administrators of the TOE. This policy covers
use and adherence to policies, procedures, system, admin, and
user documentation, associated with the TOE and all systems
that interface with the TOE.
P.UNIQUE_ID Every authorized user of an information system is uniquely
identified.
P.WARNING_BANNER
All authorized users are notified that they are subject to being
monitored, recorded, and audited through the use of an NNSA
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
14
approved warning text and positive acknowledgement by the
user is required before granting the user access to system
resources.
P.WFA Waste Fraud and Abuse is detected or prevented and reported
accordance with DOE O 221.1, Reporting Waste Fraud, and
Abuse to the Office of IG.
4. SECURITY OBJECTIVES
4.1 Security Objectives for the TOE
O.ACCESS_HISTORY The information system user is notified upon successful logon
of a) the date and time of the user’s last logon, b) the location
of the user (as can best be determined) at last logon, and c) the
number of unsuccessful logon attempts using this user ID since
the last successful logon. A positive action by the user is
required to remove the notice.
O.ACCESS_MALICIOUS
Environmental controls are required to sufficiently mitigate
(deterrence, detection, and response) the threat of malicious
actions by authenticated users. Information system controls
will help in achieving this objective, but will not be sufficient.
O.AUDIT_BASIC The following activities must be recorded:
• Successful use of the user security attribute administration
functions;
• All attempted uses of the user security attribute
administration functions; and
• Identification of which user security attributes have been
modified.
• With the exception of specific sensitive attribute data items
(e.g., passwords, cryptographic keys); new values of the
attributes should be captured.
• Successful and unsuccessful logons and logoffs;
• Unsuccessful access to security relevant files including
creating, opening, closing, modifying, and deleting those
files;
• Changes in user authenticators;
• Blocking or blacklisting user IDs, terminals, or access
ports;
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
15
• Denial of access for excessive logon attempts; and
• Starting and ending times for each access to the system
O.AUDIT_FAILURE An alternate audit capability or system shutdown must occur in
the event of audit failure or when the audit trail exceeds 80% of
capacity.
O.AUDIT_PROTECTION
The contents of audit trails must be protected against
unauthorized access, modification, or deletion.
Section 16
O.AUDIT_REVIEW There must be a process for review of user activities and
activities on behalf of the user on the TOE to detect and report
actual or attempted circumvention of the TOE Security
Functions (TSF).
O.AUTHENT_EXPOSE The clear text display or exposure of any authenticator is only
provided to the identified user during generation, issuance,
storage, or use.
O.AUTHORIZATION The TOE must ensure that only authorized users gain access to
the information and TOE resources. The TOE must ensure for
all actions under its control, except for a well-defined set of
allowed actions, all users are identified and authenticated
before being granted access to subjects and objects.
O.CREDENTIAL_PROTECTION
Authentication credentials shall be protected from unauthorized
access during creation, use, and handling.
O.DATA_CHANGES_DETERRED
Unauthorized changes to data in the information system are
detected, deterred, and reported.
O.DETECT_HOST_BASIC
The information system environment, i.e., on-line, must
provide the ability to detect low level, i.e., using methods
readily available on the Internet to attack known
vulnerabilities, attacks and the results of such attacks (e.g.,
corrupted system state), including measures to detect and
respond to unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
O.ENTRY_TOE The information system must prevent logical entry to the
information system using unsophisticated, technical methods,
by persons without authority for such access.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
16
O.ID_DISABLE User TOE access is disabled when the user leaves the
sponsoring organization, Access Authorization is terminated,
loses authorized access (for cause, changes in organization,
etc), or upon TOE detection of attempts to bypass security.
O.ID_REMOVAL Prior to reuse of a user identifier, all previous access rights and
privileges (including file accesses for that user identifier) are
removed from the TOE
O.INFO_FLOW The information system and information system environment
must ensure that any information flow control policies are
enforced - (1) between system components and (2) at the
system external interfaces.
O.INTEGRITY_LOW The TOE will require user identification and authentication to
validate the authority of the user for any changes to data.
O.MALICIOUS_CODE The TOE must have the capability to detect and eliminate
malicious code. Procedures to detect and deter incidents caused
by malicious code are employed.
O.MANAGE_TOE The information system must provide all the functions and
facilities necessary to support the authorized administrators
that are responsible for the management of information system
security.
O.NTK_NNSA Access rights to specific data objects are determined by object
attributes assigned to that object, user identity, user attributes,
and any formal access rights or privileges that NNSA has
established for the data.
O.RECOVERY_CONTROLLED
Information system recovery is controlled via monitored
terminal or system console.
O.REPLAY The information system must detect and deter replay of
entities, such as messages and service requests and response.
O.RESIDUAL_PROTECTION
The information system must ensure that identified resources
contain no residual data before being assigned, allocated, or
reallocated.
O.RESOURCE_USAGE
The information system provides the capability to control a
defined set of system resources (e. g., memory, and disk space)
Section 17
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
17
such that no one user can deny another user access to the
resources.
O.ROLES_OTHER_SECURITY
Other roles involved with security administration, such as
DBMS administration, are not performed by the same people
performing the CSSO and system administrator roles.
O.SEC_FUNC_MANAGEMENT
The information system restricts management of information
system security functions to authorized users.
O.SESSION_ESTABLISHMENT
The information system controls the establishment of sessions
(a) by denying access after multiple (maximum of five)
consecutive unsuccessful attempts on the same user ID; (b) by
limiting the number of access attempts in a specified time
period, (c) by use of a time-delay control system, or (d) by
other such methods, subject to approval by the DAA
O.TRANS_SEC_UNCLASS
Information protection is required whenever Unclassified
Protected or Unclassified Mandated Protection information is
to be transmitted, carried to, or carried through areas or
components where individuals not authorized to have access to
the information may have unescorted physical or uncontrolled
electronic access to the information or communications media
(e. g., outside the system perimeter). One or more of the
following must be used:
(a) Information distributed only within an area approved for
open storage of the information;
(b) National Security Agency (NSA)- approved type II
encryption mechanisms;
(c) DOE approved encryption mechanisms; or
(d) NNSA approved protected transmission systems.
O.TRUSTED_PATH The information system provides a trusted path between itself
and the user for initial identification and authentication.
O.TSF_DOMAIN_SEPARATION
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
18
The information system maintains a domain for its own
execution that protects it from external interference and
tampering (e. g., by reading or modifying its code and data
structures).
O.USER_INACTIVITY The information system must detect an interval of user
inactivity, such as no keyboard entries, and disable any future
user activity until the user reestablishes the correct identity
with a valid authenticator.
O.USER_LOCKING The information system provides user initiated self-locking of
interactive sessions. To unlock a user-locked session, the user
must provide the correct identity with a valid authenticator.
O.WARNING_BANNER
All authorized users are notified that they are subject to being
monitored, recorded, and audited through the use of an NNSA
approved warning text and positive acknowledgement by the
user is required before granting the user access to system
resources.
4.2 Security Objectives for the Environment
O.ACCESS Each user’s access rights and privileges are authorized, prior to
the user's first access to the TOE.
O.ACCESS_FORMAL Prior to their first access to information, each user’s need-to-
know is formally authorized by management or the data owner-
steward through a position description or written access list.
O.ACCESS_MALICIOUS
Environmental controls are required to sufficiently mitigate
(deterrence, detection, and response) the threat of malicious
actions by authenticated users. Information system controls
will help in achieving this objective, but will not be sufficient.
O.AUDIT_PROTECTION
The contents of audit trails must be protected against
unauthorized access, modification, or deletion.
O.AUTHORIZE_NON_TOE
Section 18
The IT other than the information system must provide the
ability to specify and manage user and system process access
rights to individual processing resources and data elements
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
19
under its control, supporting the organization’s security policy
for access control.
O.AVAILABILITY_LOW
Resources are provided to allow the information system user to
perform data backup at the user’s discretion.
O.CLEARING The information system components and removable media are
cleared before the items can be reused in another system
environment with the same or different accreditation level as
the original system components or removable media.
O.CREDENTIAL_PROTECTION
Authentication credentials shall be protected from unauthorized
access, modification, deletion, or destruction.
O.DATA_BACKUP_BASIC
User and information system data are available, or restorable,
to meet mission availability requirements. Periodic checking
of backup inventory and testing of the ability to restore
information is accomplished to validate mission availability
requirements are met.
O.DETECT_EXTERNAL_BASIC
The site environment, i.e., on-line, must provide the ability to
detect low level, i.e., using methods readily available on the
Internet to attack known vulnerabilities, attacks on the hosts
and networks from outside the site and the results of such
attacks (e.g., corrupted system state), including measures to
detect and respond to unauthorized attempts to penetrate or
deny use.
O.DETECT_NETWORK_BASIC
The network environment, i.e., on-line, must provide the ability
to detect low level, i.e., using methods readily available on the
Internet to attack known vulnerabilities, attacks on the network
and its components, and the results of such attacks (e.g.,
corrupted system state), including measures to detect and
respond to unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
O.DETECT_SITE_BASIC
The site environment, i.e., physical, must provide the ability to
detect low level, i.e., using readily available methods to attack
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
20
known vulnerabilities, attacks on the hosts and networks from
inside the site and the results of such attacks (e.g., corrupted
system state), including measures to detect and respond to
unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
O.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL
The information system environment must provide sufficient
protection against non-technical attacks by other than
authenticated users. User training and awareness will provide a
major part of achieving this objective.
O.ENTRY_NON_TOE For resources not controlled by the information system, IT
other than the information system must prevent logical entry
using unsophisticated, technical methods, by persons without
authority for such access.
O.FORENSICS_PROC Procedures are established and documented to ensure the
identification, collection, and preservation of data needed to
analyze penetration reconstruction, on-going cyber attacks and/
or failures
O.HARDWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM
Information system hardware components are examined for
security impacts to the information system before use
O.ID_DISABLE User TOE access is disabled when the user leaves the
sponsoring organization, Access Authorization is terminated,
loses authorized access (for cause, changes in organization,
etc), or upon TOE detection of attempts to bypass security.
Section 19
O.ID_REMOVAL Prior to reuse of a user identifier, all previous access rights and
privileges (including file accesses for that user identifier) are
removed from the TOE
O.ID_REVALIDATION
User access, contact information, rights, and privileges, to
include sponsor, Access Authorization, need-to-know, means
for off line contact, mailing address, are validated annually.
O.INFO_FLOW The information system and information system environment
must ensure that any information flow control policies are
enforced - (1) between system components and (2) at the
system external interfaces.
O.MARK_COMPONENT
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
21
Each host, visual display, and output device will be marked
with the sensitivity label (level) of the most sensitive
Information Group the system is accredited to process, store, or
transmit.
O.MARK_OUTPUT All system output and removable media are appropriately
marked with the level and category of the highest information
sensitivity of the Information Groups that the system is
accredited to operate with, or marked in with the sensitivity
label for the information.
O.MEDIA_REVIEW All media (paper, disks, zip drives, removable disk drives, etc.)
are reviewed for classification and sensitivity and properly
marked before release outside the system boundary.
O.NETWORK_INTERFACE
The developers of the information system must ensure the
information system security is not affected by the
characteristics of the network(s) to which the information
system is interfaced.
O.PHYS_MANDATED Systems containing Unclassified Mandatory Protection
information must be protected in one of the following ways:
constantly attended or under the control of a person that
possesses formal access approval and need to know; or
protected in a manner described for Confidential Information;
or protected within locked rooms or buildings.
O.PHYSICAL Physical attack that might compromise IT security on those
parts of the information system critical to security is deterred
and detected, primarily via prevention within the limits of
COTS technology.
O.PHYSICAL_PROTECTION
The individuals responsible for the information system must
ensure that the environment is capable of physically protecting
the information system by signaling the occurrence of fire,
flood, power loss, and environmental control failures that
might adversely affect information system operations.
O.RECOVERY_CONTROLLED
Information system recovery is controlled via monitored
terminal or system console.
O.REPLAY The information system must detect and deter replay of
entities, such as messages and service requests and response.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
22
O.ROLES_OTHER_SECURITY
Other roles involved with security administration, such as
DBMS administration, are not performed by the same people
performing the CSSO and system administrator roles.
O.SOFTWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM
Information system software components are examined and
tested for security impacts to the information system before
use.
O.TRAINING All users are trained to understand applicable information
system-use policies, the approved use of the information
system, the vulnerabilities inherent in the operation of the
information system, and their cyber security responsibilities.
O.TRANS_SEC_UNCLASS
Section 20
Information protection is required whenever Unclassified
Protected or Unclassified Mandated Protection information is
to be transmitted, carried to, or carried through areas or
components where individuals not authorized to have access to
the information may have unescorted physical or uncontrolled
electronic access to the information or communications media
(e. g., outside the system perimeter). One or more of the
following must be used:
(a) Information distributed only within an area approved for
open storage of the information;
(b) National Security Agency (NSA)- approved type II
encryption mechanisms;
(c) DOE approved encryption mechanisms; or
(d) NNSA approved protected transmission systems.
O.UNESCORT_ACCESS_UNCLASS
Access controls ensure that personnel granted unescorted
physical access to the information, the information system or
human readable media have the appropriate formal access
approvals and need-to-know.
O.WARNING_BANNER
All authorized users are notified that they are subject to being
monitored, recorded, and audited through the use of an NNSA
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
23
approved warning text and positive acknowledgement by the
user is required before granting the user access to system
resources.
5. IT SECURITY REQUIREMENTS
A MANDPP-conformant TOE may include information systems that are personal electronic
devices, portable computers, and systems containing general-purpose operating systems, such as
workstations, mainframes, or personal computers. These systems can be comprised of a single
host or a set of cooperating hosts in a distributed system. Such systems permit one or more
processors along with peripherals and storage devices to be used by single or multiple users to
perform a variety of functions requiring access to the information stored on the system. The
security functional and assurance requirements defined in this section must be applied to all
elements in the TOE.
Some TOE components, where a single general user has the authority and responsibility to
protect all general user data/information on the component (typically a single user desktop
system) may be exempted from implementing these PP requirements with the approval of the
cognizant Designated Approving Authority. Any TOE component where multiple general users
may access data or share TOE resources must comply with the MANDPP requirements.
5.1 TOE Security Functional Requirements
This section defines the functional requirements for the TOE. Functional requirements
components in this profile were drawn from Part 2 of the CC. Some functional requirements are
extensions to those found in the CC.
CC defined operations for assignment, selection, and refinement were used to tailor the
requirements to the level of detail necessary to meet the stated security objectives. These
operations are indicated through the use of underlined (assignments and selections) and italicized
(refinements) text. All required operations not performed within this profile are clearly identified
and described such that they can be correctly performed upon instantiation of the PP into a
Security Target (ST) specification.
NOTE: Where italicized items are listed in an assignment or selection clause in one of the
following components, the ST developer must address the component and provide the
information identified in the italicized clause. If the assignment or selection clause is not
italicized, the item is mandatory and must be addressed in the ST.
Section 21
5.1.1 FAU_ARP.1 Security alarms
5.1.1.1 FAU_ARP.1.1 The TSF shall take [assignment: list of the least disruptive actions]
upon detection of a potential security violation.
Application Note: The ST must state the actions taken by the TOE when a potential
security violation, such as detection of malicious code, or a successful or unsuccessful
intrusion.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
24
5.1.2 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation
5.1.2.1 FAU_GEN.1.1 The TSF shall be able to generate an audit record of the following
auditable events:
• Start-up and shutdown of the audit functions;
• All auditable events for the basic level of audit and
• The events listed below:
§ Successful use of the user security attribute administration
functions
§ All attempted uses of the user security attribute
administration functions
§ Identification of which user security attributes have been
modified
§ Successful and unsuccessful logons and logoffs
§ Unsuccessful access to security relevant files including
creating, opening, closing, modifying, and deleting those
files
§ Changes in user authenticators
§ Blocking or blacklisting user Ids, terminals, or access ports
§ Denial of access for excessive logon attempts
§ System accesses by privileged users; a. Privileged activities
at the system console (either physical or logical consoles)
and other system- level accesses by privileged users.
§ Starting and ending times for each access to the system
Application Note: For some situations it is possible that some events cannot be
automatically generated. This is usually due to the audit functions not being operational
at the time these events occur. Such events need to be documented in administrative
guidance, along with recommendations on how manual auditing should be established
to cover these events.
The "basic" level of auditing was selected as best representing the "mainstream" of
contemporary audit practices used in the target environments.
5.1.2.2 FAU_GEN.1.2 The TSF shall record within each audit record at least the
following information:
a. Date and time of the event, type of event, subject identity, and
the outcome (success or failure) of the event; and
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
25
b. For each audit event type, based on the auditable event
definitions of the functional components included in the PP/ST,
[assignment: other audit relevant information]
5.1.3 FAU_GEN.2 User identity association
5.1.3.1 FAU_GEN.2.1 The TSF shall be able to associate each auditable event with the
identity of the user that caused the event.
Application Note: There are some auditable events that may not be associated with a
user, such as failed login attempts. It is acceptable that such events do not include a user
identity. In the case of failed login attempts it is also acceptable not to record the
attempted identity in cases where that attempted identity could be misdirected
authentication data; for example when the user may have been out of sync and typed a
password in place of a user identifier.
5.1.4 FAU_SAA.4 Complex attack heuristics
5.1.4.1 FAU_SAA.4.1 The TSF shall be able to maintain an internal representation of
the following event sequences of known intrusion scenarios
[assignment: list of sequences of system events whose occurrence
are representative of known penetration scenarios] and the
following signature events [assignment: a subset of system events]
that may indicate a potential violation of the TSP.
Section 22
Application Note: The ST must describe, or reference documentation of, known or
suspected system events and penetration scenarios that may indicate a potential security
violation. The specific manner of implementation is TOE dependent and can be
achieved through the use of intrusion detection software on the TOE or in the local area
network where the TOE is located.
5.1.4.2 FAU_SAA.4.2 The TSF shall be able to compare the signature events and event
sequences against the record of system activity discernible from an
examination of [assignment: the information to be used to
determine system activity].
Application Note: See application note for FAU_SAA.4.1.
5.1.4.3 FAU_SAA.4.3 The TSF shall be able to indicate an imminent violation of the TSP
when system activity is found to match a signature event or event
sequence that indicates a potential violation of the TSP.
Application Note: See application note for FAU_SAA.4.1.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
26
5.1.5 FAU_SAR.1 Audit review
5.1.5.1 FAU_SAR.1.1 The TSF shall provide [assignment: Computer System Security
Officers (CSSO) and authorized system administrators] with the
capability to read [assignment: all audit information] from the
audit records.
Application Note: The minimum information that must be provided is the same that
which is required to be recorded in FAU_GEN.1.2. The intent of this requirement is
that there exists a tool for an administrator to access the audit trail in order to assess it.
Exactly what manner is provided is an implementation decision, but it needs to be done
in a way that allows the administrator to make effective use of the information
presented. This requirement is closely tied to FAU_SAR.3 and FAU_SEL.1. It is
expected that a single tool will exist within the TSF that will satisfy all of these
requirements.
5.1.5.2 FAU_SAR.1.2 The TSF shall provide the audit records in a manner suitable for
the user to interpret the information.
5.1.6 FAU_SAR.2 Restricted audit review
5.1.6.1 FAU_SAR.2.1 The TSF shall prohibit all users read access to the audit records,
except those users that have been granted explicit read-access.
Application Note: By default, CSSOs and authorized system administrators may be
considered to have been granted read access to the audit records. The TSF may provide
a mechanism that allows other users to also read audit records.
5.1.7 FAU_SAR.3 Selectable audit review
5.1.7.1 FAU_SAR.3.1 The TSF shall provide the ability to perform [selection: searches,
sorting, and ordering] of audit data based on based on the
following attributes:
a. User identity;
b. [assignment: list of additional attributes that audit selectivity is
based upon]
Application Note: The ST must state the additional attributes that audit selectivity may be
based upon (e. g., object identity, type of event), if any.
5.1.8 FAU_SEL.1 Selective Audit
5.1.8.1 FAU_SEL.1.1 The TSF shall be able to include or exclude auditable events from
the set of audited events based on the following attributes:
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
27
a. User identity;
b. [assignment: list of additional attributes that audit selectivity is
based upon].
Application Note: The ST must state the additional attributes that audit selectivity may
be based upon (e. g., object identity, type of event), if any.
5.1.9 FAU_STG.2 Guarantees of audit data availability
Section 23
5.1.9.1 FAU_STG.2.1 The TSF shall protect the stored audit records from unauthorized
deletion.
5.1.9.2 FAU_STG.2.2 The TSF shall be able to [selection: prevent] modifications to the
audit records.
Application Note: On many systems, in order to reduce the performance impact of audit
generation, audit records will be temporarily buffered in memory before they are
written to disk. In these cases, it is likely that some of these records will be lost if the
operation of the TOE is interrupted by hardware or power failures. The developer needs
to document what the likely loss will be and show that it has been minimized.
5.1.9.3 FAU_STG.2.3 The TSF shall ensure that [assignment: all audit records already
written to media, i.e., not in memory buffers,] audit records will be
maintained when the following conditions occur: [selection: audit
storage exhaustion, failure, and attack]...
5.1.10 FAU_STG.3 Action in case of possible audit data loss
5.1.10.1 FAU_STG.3.1 The TSF shall [assignment: generate an alarm to the CSSO or
authorized system administrator] if the audit trail exceeds
[assignment: 80% of capacity].
Application Note: For this component, an "alarm" is to be interpreted as any clear
indication to the administrator that the pre-defined limit has been exceeded. The ST
author must state the pre-defined limit that triggers generation of the alarm. The limit
can be stated as an absolute value, or as a value that represents a percentage of audit
trail capacity (e. g., audit trail 80% full). If the limit is adjustable by the authorized
administrator, the ST should also incorporate an FMT requirement to manage this
function.
5.1.11 FAU_STG.4 Prevention of audit data loss
5.1.11.1 FAU STG.4.1 The TSF shall [selection: be able to prevent auditable events,
except those taken by the CSSO or authorized system
administrator,] and [assignment: other actions to be taken in case
of audit storage failure] if the audit trail is full.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
28
Application Note: The selection of "preventing auditable actions if audit storage is
exhausted" is minimal functionality; providing a range of configurable choices (e. g.,
ignoring auditable actions and/ or changing to a degraded mode) is allowable, as long as
"preventing" is one of the choices. If configurable, then FMT_ MOF.1 should be
incorporated into the ST.
5.1.12 FCS_CKM.4 Cryptographic key destruction
5.1.12.1 FCS_CKM.4.1 The TSF shall destroy cryptographic keys in accordance with a
specified cryptographic key destruction method [assignment:
cryptographic key destruction method] that meets the following:
[assignment: list of standards].
5.1.13 FCS_COP.1 Cryptographic operation
5.1.13.1 FCS_COP.1.1 The TSF shall perform [assignment: list of cryptographic
operations] in accordance with a specified cryptographic algorithm
[assignment: cryptographic algorithm] and cryptographic key sizes
[assignment: cryptographic key sizes] that meet the following:
[assignment: list of standards].
5.1.14 FDP_ACC.2 Complete access control
5.1.14.1 FDP_ACC.2.1 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: Discretionary Access
Control Policy (DAC)] on [assignment: list of subjects] acting on
the behalf of users, [assignment: list of named objects] and all
operations among subjects and objects covered by the SFP [DAC
policy].
Application Note: For most systems there is only one type of subject, usually called a
process or task, which needs to be specified in the ST.
Section 24
Named objects are those objects that are used to share information among subjects
acting on the behalf of different users, and for which access to the object can be
specified by a name or other identity. Any object that meets this criterion but is not
controlled by the DAC policy must be justified.
The list of operations covers all operations between the above two lists. It may consist
of a sublist for each subject-named object pair. Each operation needs to specify which
type of access right is needed to perform the operation; for example read access or write
access.
5.1.14.2 FDP_ACC.2.2 The TSF shall ensure that all operations between any subject in
the TSC and any object within the TSC are covered by an access
control SFP.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
29
5.1.15 FDP_ACF.1 Security attribute based access control
5.1.15.1 FDP_ACF.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: Discretionary Access
Control Policy] to objects based on [assignment: the following:]
a. The user identity and group membership(s) associated with a
subject;
b. The following access control attributes associated with an
object; and
c. [assignment: List access control attributes. The attributes must
provide permission attributes with:
1. the ability to associate allowed or denied operations with one
or more user identities;
2. the ability to associate allowed or denied operations with one
or more group identities; and
3. defaults for allowed or denied operations].
5.1.15.2 FDP_ACF.1.2 The TS F shall enforce the following rules to determine if an
operation among controlled subjects and controlled objects is
allowed: [assignment: a set of rules specifying the Discretionary
Access Control policy, where:
a. For each operation there shall be a rule, or rules, that use the
permission attributes where the user identity of the subject
matches a user identity specified in the access control attributes
of the object;
b. For each operation there shall be a rule, or rules, that use the
permission attributes where the group membership of the subject
matches a group identity specified in the access control attributes
of the object; and
c. For each operation there shall be a rule, or rules, which use the
default permission attributes specified in the access control
attributes of the object when neither a user identity nor group
identity matches.]
Application Note: A TOE that conforms to this PP is required to implement a DAC
policy, but the rules that govern the policy may vary between TOEs; those rules need to
be specified in the ST. In completing the rule assignment above, the resulting
mechanism must be able to specify access rules that apply to at least any single user.
This single user may have a special status such as the owner of the object. The
mechanism must also support specifying access to the membership of at least any single
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
30
group. Conformant implementations include self/ group/ public controls and access
control lists.
A DAC policy may cover rules on accessing public objects; i.e., objects which are
readable to all authorized users, but which can only be altered by the TSF or
administrators. Specification of these rules should be covered under FDP_ACF.1.3 and
FDP_ACF.1.4.
A DAC policy may include exceptions to the basic policy for access by administrators
or other forms of special authorization. These rules should be covered under
FDP_ACF.1.3.
Section 25
The ST must list the attributes that are used by the DAC policy for access decisions.
These attributes may include permission bits, access control lists, and object ownership.
A single set of access control attributes may be associated with multiple objects, such
as all objects stored on a single floppy disk. The association may also be indirectly
bound to the object, such as access control attributes being associated with the name of
the object rather than directly to the object itself.
5.1.15.3 FDP_ACF.1.3 The TSF shall explicitly authorize access of subjects to objects
based on the following additional rules: [assignment: rules, based
on security attributes, that explicitly authorize access of subjects to
objects].
5.1.15.4 FDP_ACF.1.4 The TSF shall explicitly deny access of subjects to objects based on
the [assignment: rules, based on security attributes, that explicitly
deny access of subjects to objects].
5.1.16 FDP_DAU.1 Basic data authentication
5.1.16.1 FDP_DAU.1.1 The TSF shall provide a capability to generate evidence that can
be used as a guarantee of the validity of [assignment: list of objects
or information types].
5.1.16.2 FDP_DAU.1.2 The TSF shall provide [assignment: list of subjects] with the ability
to verify evidence of the validity of the indicated information.
5.1.17 FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control
5.1.17.1 FDP_IFC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy on
[assignment: list of subjects, information, and operations that cause
controlled information to flow to and from controlled subjects
covered by the SFP].
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
31
5.1.18 FDP_IFF.1 Simple security attributes
5.1.18.1 FDP_IFF.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy
based on the following types of subject and information security
attributes: [assignment: the minimum number and type of security
attributes].
5.1.18.2 FDP_IFF.1.2 The TSF shall permit an information flow between a controlled
subject and controlled information via a controlled operation if
the following rules hold: [assignment: for each operation, the
security attribute-based relationship that must hold between
subject and information security attributes].
5.1.18.3 FDP_IFF.1.3 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: additional information flow
control SFP rules].
5.1.18.4 FDP_IFF.1.4 The TSF shall provide the following [assignment: list of additional
SFP capabilities].
5.1.18.5 FDP_IFF.1.5 The TSF shall explicitly authorize an information flow based on
the following rules: [assignment: rules, based on security attributes,
that explicitly authorize information flows].
5.1.18.6 FDP_IFF.1.6 The TSF shall explicitly deny an information flow based on the
following rules: [assignment: rules, based on security attributes,
that explicitly deny information flows].
5.1.19 FDP_ITC.1 Import of user data without security attributes
5.1.19.1 FDP_ITC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: discretionary Access
Control Policy] when importing user data, controlled under the
SFP, from outside of the TSC.
5.1.19.2 FDP_ITC.1.2 The TSF shall ignore any security attributes associated with the
user data when imported from outside the TSC.
5.1.19.3 FDP_ITC.1.3 The TSF shall enforce the following rules when importing user
data controlled under the SFP from outside the TSC: [assignment:
additional importation control rules].
Section 26
5.1.20 FDP_RIP.1 Subset residual information protection
5.1.20.1 FDP_RIP.1.1 The TSF shall ensure that any previous information content of a
resource is made unavailable upon the [selection: allocation of the
resource] to the following objects: [assignment: list of objects].
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
32
Application Note: This requirement applies to the list of resources stated in the ST; it
includes resources used to contain data and attributes. It also includes the encrypted
representation of information.
Clearing the information content store of resources on deallocation from objects is
sufficient to satisfy this requirement, if unallocated resources will not accumulate new
information until they are allocated again.
5.1.21 FDP_SDI.2 Stored data integrity monitoring and action
5.1.21.1 FDP_SDI.2.1 The TSF shall monitor user data stored within the TSC for
[assignment: unauthorized modification and unauthorized
deletion] on all objects, based on the following attributes:
[assignment: user data attributes].
Application Note: The ST must describe the user data attributes, i.e. file names,
directory names, sizes, etc., that will be used in the detection of unauthorized activities
on the data.
5.1.21.2 FDP_SDI.2.2 Upon detection of a data integrity error, the TSF shall
[assignment: enter a description of the error in the audit log and
issue an alarm].
Application Note: For this component, an "alarm" is to be interpreted as any clear
indication to the administrator that a data integrity error has been detected. The ST must
state the conditions that trigger generation of the alarm.
5.1.22 FIA_AFL.1 Authentication failure handling
5.1.22.1 FIA_AFL.1.1 The TSF shall detect when [assignment: five (5) consecutive]
unsuccessful authentication attempts occur related to [assignment:
list of authentication events].
Application Note: The ST must state the authentication events that will be monitored
for 5 consecutive unsuccessful authentication attempts. The ST should also identify
any authentication activities that are not monitored for unsuccessful authentication
attempts.
5.1.22.2 FIA_AFL.1.2 When the defined number of unsuccessful authentication attempts
has been met or surpassed, the TSF shall [assignment: list of
actions].
5.1.23 FIA_ATD.1 User attribute definition
5.1.23.1 FIA_ATD.1.1 The TSF shall maintain the following list of security attributes
belonging to individual users: [assignment:
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
33
a. User Identifier;
b. Group Memberships;
c. Authentication Data;
d. Security-relevant Roles; and
e. [assignment: other user security attributes].
Application Note: The specified attributes are those that are required by the TSF to
enforce the DAC policy, the generation of audit records, and proper identification and
authentication of users. The user identity must be uniquely associated with a single
individual user.
Group membership may be expressed in a number of ways: a list per user specifying to
which groups the user belongs, a list per group which includes which users are
members, or implicit association between certain user identities and certain groups. A
TOE may have two forms of user and group identities, a text form and a numeric form.
In these cases there must be unique mapping between the representations.
5.1.24 FIA_SOS.1 Verification of secrets
Section 27
5.1.24.1 FIA_ SOS.1 The TSF shall provide a mechanism to verify that secrets meet
[assignment: the P.STRONG_AUTHENTICATION policy].
Application Note: The P.STRONG_AUTHENTICATION policy applies to all other
information system users. The method of authentication is unspecified by this PP, but
must be specified in the ST. The method that is used must be shown to implement the
P.STRONG_AUTHENTICATION policy. If a password mechanism is used, the
mechanism must comply with NNSA password policies. The strength of whatever
mechanism implemented must be subjected to strength of function analysis. (See
AVA_SOF.1)
5.1.25 FIA_UAU.1 Timing of authentication
5.1.25.1 FIA_UAU.1.1 The TSF shall allow [assignment: list of TSF mediated actions] on
behalf of the user to be performed before the user is authenticated.
Application Note: The ST must specify the actions that are allowed by an
unauthenticated user. The allowed actions should be limited to those things that aid an
authenticated user in gaining access to the TOE. This could include help facilities or
the ability to send a message to administrators.
5.1.25.2 FIA_UAU.1.2 The TSF shall require each user to be successfully authenticated
before allowing any other TSF-mediated actions on the behalf of
that user.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
34
5.1.26 FIA_UAU.7 Protected authentication feedback
5.1.26.1 FIA_UAU.7.1 The TSF shall provide only [assignment: obscured feedback] to
the user while the authentication is in progress.
Application Note: Obscured feedback implies the TSF does not produce a visible
display of any authentication data entered by a user, such as through a keyboard (e. g.,
echo the password on the terminal). It is acceptable that some indication of progress be
returned instead, such as a period returned for each character sent.
Some forms of input, such as card input based batch jobs, may contain human-readable
user passwords. The administrative and user guidance documentation must explain the
risks in placing passwords on such input and must suggest procedures to mitigate that
risk.
5.1.27 FIA_UID.1 Timing of identification
5.1.27.1 FIA_UID.1.1 The TSF shall allow [assignment: list of TSF-mediated actions] on
behalf of the user to be performed before the user is identified.
5.1.27.2 FIA_UID.1.2 The TSF shall require each user to be successfully identified
before allowing any other TSF-mediated actions on behalf of that
user.
Application Note: The ST must specify the actions that are allowed to an unidentified
user. The allowed actions should be limited to those things that aid an authenticated
user in gaining access to the TOE. This could include help facilities or the ability to
send messages to administrators.
The method of identification is unspecified by this PP, but should be specified in a ST
and it should specify how this relates to user identifiers maintained by the TSF.
5.1.28 FIA_USB.1 User-subject binding
5.1.28.1 FIA_USB.1.1 The TSF shall associate the appropriate user security attributes
with subjects acting on behalf of that user.
a. The user identity which is associated with auditable events;
b. The user identity or identities which are used to enforce the
Discretionary Access Control Policy;
c. The group membership or memberships used to enforce the
Discretionary Access Control Policy;
d. [assignment: any other user security attributes].
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
Section 28
35
5.1.29 FIA_USB.1 User-subject binding
5.1.29.1 FIA_USB.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the following rules governing changes to the
user security attributes associated with subjects acting on the
behalf of a user: [assignment: changing of attributes rules].
Application Note: The DAC policy and audit generation require that each subject acting
on the behalf of users have a user identity associated with the subject. This identity is
normally the one used at the time of identification to the system. The DAC policy
enforced by the TSF may include provisions for making access decisions based on a
user identity that differs from the one used during identification.
The ST must state, in FIA_USB.1.1, how this alternate identity is associated with a
subject and justify why the individual user associated with this alternate identity is not
compromised by the mechanism used to implement it. Depending on the TSF's
implementation of group membership, the associations between a subject and groups
may be explicit at the time of identification or implicit in a relationship between user
and group identifiers. The ST must specify this association. Like user identification, an
alternate group mechanism may exist, and parallel requirements apply.
5.1.30 FMT_MOF.1 Management of security functions behavior
5.1.30.1 FMT_MOF.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to [selection: determine the
behavior of, disable, enable, modify the behavior of] the functions
[assignment: list of functions] to [assignment: CSSOs and
authorized system administrators].
Application Note: The ST must state the restrictions and functions applied to the
management of TOE security functions by the CSSO and authorized system
administrators.
5.1.31 FMT_MSA.1 Management of security attributes
5.1.31.1 FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: Discretionary Access
Control Policy] to restrict the ability to [selection: modify] the
security attributes [assignment: access control attributes associated
with a named object] to [assignment: the authorized users].
Application Note: The ST must state the components of the access rights that may be
modified, and must state any restrictions that may exist for a type of authorized user
and the components of the access rights that the user is allowed to modify. The ability
to modify access rights must be restricted in that a user having access rights to a named
object does not have the ability to modify those access rights unless explicitly granted
the right to do so. This restriction may be explicit, based on the object ownership, or
based on a set of object hierarchy rules.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
36
5.1.32 FMT_MSA.2 Secure security attributes
5.1.32.1 FMT_MSA.2.1 The TSF shall ensure that only secure values are accepted for
security attributes.
5.1.33 FMT_MSA.3 Static attribute initialization
5.1.33.1 FMT_MSA.3.1 The TSF shall enforce the [assignment: Discretionary Access
Control Policy] to provide [selection: restrictive] default values for
security attributes that are used to enforce the SFP [Discretionary
Access Control Policy].
5.1.33.2 FMT_MSA.3.2 The TSF shall allow the [assignment: the authorized identified
roles] to specify alternative initial values to override the default
values when an object or information is created.
Section 29
Application Note: A TOE conforming to this PP must provide protection by default for
all objects at creation time. This may be done through the enforcing of a restrictive
default access control on newly created objects or by requiring the user to explicitly
specify the desired access controls on the object at its creation. In either case, there
shall be no window of vulnerability through which unauthorized access may be gained
to newly created objects.
5.1.34 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data
5.1.34.1 FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to [selection: create, delete, and
clear] the [assignment: audit trail] to [assignment: CSSOs and
authorized system administrators].
Application Note: The selection of "create, delete, and clear" functions for audit trail
management reflect common management functions. These functions should be
considered generic; any other audit administration functions that are critical to the
management of a particular audit mechanism implementation should be specified in the
ST.
5.1.35 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data
5.1.35.1 FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to modify or observe the set of
audited events to administrators.
Application Note: The set of audited events are the subset of auditable events that will
be audited by the TSF. The term set is used loosely here and refers to the total collection
of possible ways to control which audit records get generated; this could be by type of
record, identity of user, identity of object, etc. It is an important aspect of audit that users
are able to affect which of their actions are audited, and therefore must not have control
over or knowledge of the selection of an event for auditing.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
37
5.1.36 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data
5.1.36.1 FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to initialize and modify the user
security attributes, other than authentication data, to
administrators.
Application Note: This component only applies to security attributes that are used to
maintain the TSP. Other user attributes may be specified in the ST, but control of those
attributes is not within the scope of this PP.
5.1.37 FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data
5.1.37.1 FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to modify the authentication
data to the following:
a) administrators; and
b) users authorized to modify their own authentication data
Application Note: User authentication data refers to information that users must
provide to authenticate themselves to the TSF. Examples include passwords, personal
identification numbers, and fingerprint profiles. User authentication data does not
include the user's identity. The ST must specify the authentication mechanism that
makes use of the user authentication data to verify a user's identity. This component
does not require that any user be authorized to modify their authentication information;
it only states that it is permissible. It is not necessary that requests to modify
authentication data require re-authentication of the requester's identity at the time of the
request.
5.1.38 FMT_REV.1 Revocation
5.1.38.1 FMT_REV.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to revoke security attributes
associated with the [selection: users] within the TSC to
[assignment: the CSSO and authorized system administrators].
5.1.38.2 FMT_REV.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the rules: [assignment:
a) The immediate revocation of security-relevant authorizations;
and
Section 30
b) [assignment: list of other revocation rules concerning users]].
Application Note: Many security-relevant authorizations could have serious
consequences if misused, so an immediate revocation method must exist, although it
need not be the usual method (e. g., The usual method may be editing the trusted users
profile, but the change doesn't take effect until the user logs off and logs back on. The
method for immediate revocation might be to edit the trusted users profile and "force"
the trusted user to log off.). The immediate method must be specified in the ST and in
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
38
administrator guidance. In a distributed environment the developer must provide a
description of how the "immediate" aspect of this requirement is met.
5.1.39 FMT_REV.1 Revocation
5.1.39.1 FMT_REV.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to revoke security attributes
associated with objects within the TSC to users authorized to
modify the security attributes by the Discretionary Access Control
policy.
5.1.40 FMT_REV.1 Revocation
5.1.40.1 FMT_REV.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the rules: [assignment:
a) The access rights associated with an object shall be enforced
when an access check is made; and
b) [assignment: list of other revocation rules concerning objects]].
Application Note: The DAC policy may include immediate revocation (e. g., Multics
immediately revokes access to segments) or delayed revocation (e. g., most UNIX
systems do not revoke access to already opened files). The DAC access rights are
considered to have been revoked when all subsequent access control decisions by the
TSF use the new access control information. It is not required that every operation on an
object make an explicit access control decision as long as a previous access control
decision was made to permit that operation. It is sufficient that the developer clearly
documents in guidance documentation how revocation is enforced.
5.1.41 FMT_SMR.2 Restrictions on security roles
5.1.41.1 FMT_SMR.2.1 The TSF shall maintain the roles: [assignment:
a) CSSO;
b) administrator;
c) users authorized by the Discretionary Access Control Policy to
modify object security attributes;
d) users authorized to modify their own authentication data; and
e) [assignment: other roles]].
Application Note: The ST must identify any other security relevant roles supported by
the TOE.
5.1.41.2 FMT_SMR.2.2 The TSF shall be able to associate users with roles.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
39
Application Note: A TOE conforming to this PP only needs to support a single
administrative role, referred to as the administrator. If a TOE implements multiple
independent roles, the ST should refine the use of the term administrators to specify
which roles fulfill which requirements.
This PP specifies a number of functions that are required of or restricted to an
administrator, but there may be additional functions that are specific to the TOE. This
would include any additional function that would undermine the proper operation of the
TSF. Examples of functions include: ability to access certain system resources like tape
drives or vector processors, ability to manipulate the printer queues, and ability to run
real-time programs.
5.1.41.3 FMT_SMR.2.3 The TSF shall ensure that the conditions [assignment: conditions
for the different roles] are satisfied.
Section 31
Application Note: If conditions or restrictions are applied to the different security
relevant roles supported by the TOE, the conditions or restrictions must be stated in the
ST.
5.1.42 FPT_AMT.1 Abstract machine testing
5.1.42.1 FPT_AMT.1.1 The TSF shall run a suite of tests [selection: during initial start-up,
periodically during normal operation, at the request of an authorized
user, other conditions] to demonstrate the correct operation of the
security assumptions provided by the abstract machine that
underlies the TSF.
Application Note: In general this component refers to the proper operation of the
hardware platform on which a TOE is running. The test suite needs to cover only
aspects of the hardware on which the TSF relies to implement required functions,
including domain separation. If a failure of some aspect of the hardware would not
result in the TSF compromising the functions it performs, then testing of that aspect is
not required.
5.1.43 FPT_ITC.1 Inter-TSF confidentiality during transmission
5.1.43.1 FPT_ITC.1.1 The TSF shall protect all TSF data transmitted from the TSF to a
remote trusted IT product from unauthorized disclosure during
transmission.
Application Note: The ST must describe how the data is protected by one or more of
the following:
a. Information distributed only within an area approved for open storage of the
information;
b. National Nuclear Security Agency (NNSA)- approved encryption mechanisms
appropriate for the encryption of unclassified mandatory protection information;
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
40
c. NNSA approved Protected Transmission System; and
d. Approved courier.
5.1.44 FPT_RCV.1 Manual recovery
5.1.44.1 FPT_RCV.1.1 After a failure or service discontinuity, the TSF shall enter a
maintenance mode where the ability to return the TOE to a secure
state is provided.
5.1.45 FPT_RVM.1 Non-bypassability of the TSP
5.1.45.1 FPT_RVM.1.1 The TSF shall ensure that the TSP enforcement functions are
invoked and succeed before each function within the TSC is
allowed to proceed.
Application Note: This element does not imply that there must be a reference monitor.
Rather this requires that the TSF validate all actions between subjects and objects that
require policy enforcement.
5.1.46 FPT_SEP.2 SFP domain separation
5.1.46.1 FPT_SEP.2.1 The unisolated portion of the TSF shall maintain a security
domain for its own execution that protects it from interference and
tampering by untrusted subjects.
5.1.46.2 FPT_SEP.2.2 The TSF shall enforce separation between the security domains of
subjects in the TSC.
Application Note: This component does not imply a particular implementation of a
TOE. The implementation needs to exhibit properties that the code and the data upon
which TSF relies are not alterable in ways that would compromise the TSF and that
observation of TSF data would not result in failure of the TSF to perform its job. This
could be done either by hardware mechanisms or hardware architecture. Possible
implementations include multi-state CPU’s that support multiple task spaces and
independent nodes within a distributed architecture. The second element can also be
met in a variety of ways also, including CPU support for separate address spaces,
separate hardware components, or entirely in software. The latter is likely in layered
application such as a graphic user interface system that maintains separate subjects.
Section 32
5.1.46.3 FPT_SEP.2.3 The TSF shall maintain the part of the TSF related to
[assignment: Discretionary Access Control policy] in a security
domain for their own execution that protects them from
interference and tampering by the remainder of the TSF and by
subjects untrusted with respect to those SFPs.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
41
5.1.47 FPT_STM.1 Reliable time stamps
5.1.47.1 FPT_STM.1.1 The TSF shall be able to provide reliable time stamps for its own
use.
Application Note: The generation of audit records depends on having a correct date and
time. The ST needs to specify the degree of accuracy that must be maintained in order
to maintain useful information for audit records.
5.1.48 FPT_TST.1 TSF testing
5.1.48.1 FPT_TST.1.1 The TSF shall run a suite of self-tests [selection: during initial
start-up, periodically during normal operation, at the request of the
authorized user, at the conditions [assignment: conditions under
which self test should occur]] to demonstrate the correct operation
of the TSF.
Application Note: In general this component refers to the proper operation of the TSF.
The test suite needs to cover only aspects of the required functions of the TSF,
including domain separation.
5.1.48.2 FPT_TST.1.2 The TSF shall provide authorised users with the capability to
verify the integrity of TSF data.
5.1.48.3 FPT_TST.1.3 The TSF shall provide authorised users with the capability to
verify the integrity of stored TSF executable code.
5.1.49 FRU_RSA.1 Maximum quotas
5.1.49.1 FRU_RSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce maximum quotas of the following
resources: [assignment: controlled resources] that [selection:
individual user, defined group of users, subjects] can use
[selection: simultaneously, over a specified period of time].
5.1.50 FTA_MCS.1 Basic limitation on multiple concurrent sessions
5.1.50.1 FTA_MCS.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the maximum number of concurrent
sessions that belong to the same user.
5.1.50.2 FTA_MCS.1.2 The TSF shall enforce, by default, a limit of [assignment: one (1)]
session per user.
5.1.51 FTA_SSL.1 TSF-initiated session locking
5.1.51.1 FTA_SSL.1.1 The TSF shall lock an interactive session after [assignment: time
interval of user inactivity] by:
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
42
• clearing or overwriting display devices, making the current
contents unreadable;
• disabling any activity of the user’s data access/display devices
other than unlocking the session.
5.1.51.2 FTA_SSL.1.2 The TSF shall require the following events to occur prior to
unlocking the session: [assignment: events to occur].
5.1.52 FTA_SSL.2 User-initiated locking
5.1.52.1 FTA_SSL.2.1 The TSF shall allow user-initiated locking of the user’s own
interactive session, by:
a. Clearing or overwriting display devices, making the current
contents unreadable;
b. Disabling any activity of the user’s data access/display devices
other than unlocking the session.
5.1.52.2 FTA_SSL.2.2 The TSF shall require the following events to occur prior to
unlocking the session: [assignment: events to occur].
Application Note: The ST must identify the events, if any, such as user authentication,
necessary to unlock a session.
5.1.53 FTA_TAB.1 Default TOE access banners
5.1.53.1 FTA_TAB.1.1 Before establishing a user session, the TSF shall display an
advisory warning message regarding unauthorized use of the
TOE.
Section 33
Application Note: The warning banner must comply with the NNSA PCSP minimum
banner or use an alternative banner wording approved by the organization’s general
counsel.
5.1.54 FTA_TAH.1 TOE access history
5.1.54.1 FTA_TAH.1.1 Upon successful session establishment, the TSF shall display the
[selection: date, time, method, and location] of the last successful
session establishment to the user.
5.1.54.2 FTA_TAH.1.2 Upon successful session establishment, the TSF shall display the
[selection: date, time, method, location] of the last unsuccessful
attempt to session establishment and the number of unsuccessful
attempts since the last successful session establishment.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
43
5.1.54.3 FTA_TAH.1.3 The TSF shall not erase the access history information from the
user interface without giving the user an opportunity to review the
information.
5.1.55 FTA_TSE.1 TOE session establishment
5.1.55.1 FTA_TSE.1.1 The TSF shall be able to deny session establishment based on
[assignment: attributes].
5.1.56 FTP_TRP.1 Trusted Path
5.1.56.1 FTP_TRP.1.1 The TSF shall provide a communication path between itself and
[selection: remote, local] users that is logically distinct from other
communication paths and provides assured identification of its
end points and protection of the communicated data from
modification or disclosure.
5.1.56.2 FTP_TRP.1.2 The TS F shall permit [selection: the TSF, local users, remote users]
to initiate communication via the trusted path.
5.1.56.3 FTP_TRP.1.3 The TSF shall require the use of the trusted path for initial user
authentication, [assignment: other services for which trusted path is
required]].
5.2 TOE Security Assurance Requirements
On the following pages are the detailed assurance component requirements from a
developer, content, and evaluator perspective. Also included are application notes:
5.2.1 Configuration Management
5.2.1.1 ACM_CAP.2 Configuration Items
5.2.1.1.1 Developer action elements
ACM_CAP.2.1D The developer shall provide a reference for the TOE.
ACM_CAP.2.2D The Developer shall use a Configuration Management (CM) System.
ACM_CAP.2.3D The developer shall provide CM documentation.
5.2.1.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ACM_CAP.2.1C The reference for the TOE shall be unique to each version of the TOE
ACM_CAP.2.2C The TOE shall be labeled with its reference
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
44
ACM_CAP.2.3C The CM documentation shall include a configuration list.
ACM_CAP.2.4C The configuration list shall describe the configuration items that
comprise the TOE.
ACM_CAP.2.5C The CM documentation shall describe the method used to uniquely
identify the configuration items.
ACM_CAP.2.6C The CM system shall uniquely identify all configuration items.
5.2.1.1.3 Evaluator action elements
ACM_CAP.2.1E The Evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all the
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
Application Note: This component provides three things. First it requires that the TOE
is identifiable, using such things as version and part numbers, to ensure that the proper
thing is installed. Second it requires that the pieces used to produce the TOE are
identified. And third it requires that the production of the TOE be done in a controlled
manner.
5.2.2 Delivery and Operation
5.2.2.1 ADO_DEL.1 Delivery Procedures
Section 34
5.2.2.1.1 Developer action elements
ADO_DEL.1.1D The developer shall document procedures for delivery of the TOE or
parts of it to the user.
ADO_DEL.1.2D The developer shall use the delivery procedures.
5.2.2.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ADO_DEL.1.1C The delivery documentation shall describe all procedures that are
necessary to maintain security when distributing versions of the TOE to
the user’s site.
5.2.2.3 Evaluator action elements
ADO_DEL.1.1E The Evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all the
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
Application Note: The delivery procedures for the TOE can vary greatly and range
from a shrink-wrapped box from a retail outlet to delivery by a field engineer. As such,
there may be opportunities for third parties to tamper with the TOE delivery process.
In these cases the developer should provide proven procedures or mechanisms to
mitigate the threat.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
45
5.2.2.4 ADO_IGS.1 Installation, generation, and startup procedures.
5.2.2.4.1 Developer action elements
ADO_IGS.1.1D The developer shall document procedures necessary for the secure
installation, generation, and startup of the TOE.
5.2.2.5 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ADO_IGS.1.1C The documentation shall describe the steps necessary for secure
installation, generation, and start-up of the TOE.
5.2.2.6 Evaluator action elements
ADO_IGS.1.1E The Evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all the
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence
ADO_IGS.1.2E The evaluator shall determine that the installation, generation and
startup procedures result in a secure configuration.
Application Note: The required documentation depends on the way that the TOE is
generated and installed. For example the generation of the TOE from source code may
be done at the development site, in which case the required documentation would be
considered part of the design documentation. On the other hand, if some part of the
TOE generation is done by the TOE administrator, it would be part of the administrative
guidance. Similar circumstances would apply to both installation and startup
procedures.
5.2.3 Development
5.2.3.1 ADV_FSP.1 Informal functional specification
5.2.3.1.1 Developer action elements
ADV_FSP.1.1D The developer shall provide a functional specification.
5.2.3.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ADV_FSP.1.1C The functional specification shall describe the TSF and its external
interfaces using an informal style
ADV_FSP.1.2C The functional specification shall be internally consistent.
ADV_FSP.1.3C The functional specification shall describe the purpose and method of
use of all external TSF interfaces, providing details of effects, exceptions,
and error messages as appropriate.
ADV_FSP.1.4C The functional specification shall completely represent the TSF.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
46
5.2.3.1.3 Evaluator action elements
ADV_FSP.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all the
requirements for content and presentation of evidence.
ADV_FSP.1.2E The evaluator shall determine that the functional specification is an
accurate and complete representation of the TOE security functional
requirements.
Section 35
Application Note: This component requires that the design documentation includes a
complete external description of the TSF. In particular it needs to address the
mechanisms that are used to meet the functional requirements of the PP. Other areas
need to be addressed to the degree that they affect the functional requirements
5.2.3.2 ADV_HLD.1 Descriptive high-level design.
5.2.3.2.1 Developer action elements
ADV_HLD.1.1D The developer shall provide the high level design of the TSF.
5.2.3.2.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ADV_HLD.1.1C The presentation of the high-level design shall be informal.
ADV_HLD.1.2C The high-level design shall be internally consistent.
ADV_HLD.1.3C The high-level design shall describe the structure of the TSF in terms of
subsystems.
ADV_HLD.1.4C The high-level design shall describe the security functionality provided
by each subsystem of the TSF.
ADV_HLD.1.5C The high-level design shall identify any underlying hardware, firmware,
and / or software required by the TSF with a presentation of the
functions provided by the supporting protection mechanisms
implemented in that hardware, firmware, or software.
ADV_HLD.1.6C The high-level design shall identify all interfaces to the subsystems of the
TSF.
ADV_HLD.1.7C The high-level design shall identify which of the interfaces to the
subsystems of the TSF are externally visible.
5.2.3.2.3 Evaluator action elements
ADV_HLD.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
47
ADV_HLD.1.2E The evaluator shall determine that the high-level design is an accurate
and complete instantiation of the TOE security functional requirements.
Application Note: This component requires that the design documentation include a
breakdown of the TSF at a very coarse grain. Both the developer and evaluator need to
carefully choose how a subsystem is defined for a particular TOE. There must be a
balance between subsystems being too large that is difficult to understand the functions
of a single subsystem and subsystems that are so small that how they fit into the system
as a whole is difficult to understand. If different pieces of the TSF are maintained by
different groups of developers, that can aid in making these choices. Furthermore, it
must be noted that the presentation need only be informal. This means that the
interfaces between subsystems need be presented in general terms of how they interact,
not to the level pf presenting a programming interface specification between them.
5.2.3.3 ADV_RCR.1 Informal correspondence demonstration
5.2.3.3.1 Developer action elements
ADV_RCR.1.1D The developer shall provide an analysis of the correspondence between
all adjacent pairs of the TSF representations that are provided.
5.2.3.3.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ADV_RCR.1.1C For each adjacent pair of the provided TSF representations the analysis
shall demonstrate that all relevant security functionality of the more
abstract TSF representation is correctly and completely refined in the
less abstract representation.
5.2.3.3.3 Evaluator action elements
ADV_RCR.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
Application Note: For the PP, this ensures that the functional specifications
and high-level design are consistent with each other.
Section 36
5.2.4 Guidance Documents
5.2.4.1 AGD_ADM.1 Administrator Guidance
5.2.4.1.1 Developer action elements
AGD_ADM.1.1D The developer shall provide administrator guidance addressed to system
administrative personnel.
5.2.4.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
AGD_ADM.1.1C The administrator guidance shall describe the administrative functions
and interfaces available to the administrator of the TOE.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
48
AGD_ADM.1.2C The administrator guidance shall describe how to administer the TEO in
a secure manner.
AGD_ADM.1.3C The administrator guidance shall contain warnings about functions and
privileges that should be controlled in a secure processing environment.
AGD_ADM.1.4C The administrator guidance shall describe all assumptions regarding
user behavior that are relevant to secure operation of the TOE
AGD_ADM.1.5C The administrator guidance shall describe all security parameters under
the control of the administrator, indicating secure values as appropriate.
AGD_ADM.1.6C The administrator guidance shall describe each type of security relevant
event relative to the administrative function that need to be performed,
including changing the security characteristics of entities under the
control of the TSF.
AGD_ADM.1.7C The administrator guidance shall describe be consistent with all other
documentation supplied for evaluation.
AGD_ADM.1.8C The administrator guidance shall describe all security requirements for
the IT environment that are relevant to the administrator.
5.2.4.1.3 Evaluator action elements
AGD_ADM.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
Application Note: The content required by this component is quite comprehensive and
broadly stated: in particular the content needs to address any of the mechanisms and
functions provided to the administrator to meet the functional requirements of the PP.
It should also contain warnings about actions that may typically be done by
administrators that should not be done on this specific TOE. This may include
activating certain features or installing certain software that would compromise the
TSF.
5.2.4.2 AGD_USR.1 User Guidance
5.2.4.2.1 Developer action elements
AGD_USR.1.1D The developer shall provide guidance
5.2.4.2.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
AGD_USR.1.1C The user guidance shall describe the functions and interfaces available to
the non-administrative users of the TOE.
AGD_USR.1.2C The user guidance shall describe the use of user accessible security
functions provided by the TOE
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
49
AGD_USR.1.3C The user guidance shall contain warnings about user accessible functions
and privileges that should be controlled in a secure processing
environment.
AGD_USR.1.4C The user guidance shall clearly present all user responsibilities necessary
for the secure operation of the TOE, including those related to
assumptions regarding user behavior found in the statement of the TOE
security environment. Note: this includes the securing of media,
passwords, and etc.
AGD_USR.1.5C The user guidance shall be consistent with all other documentation
supplied for evaluation.
AGD_USR.1.6C The user guidance shall describe all security requirements for the IT
environment that are relevant to the user.
5.2.4.2.3 Evaluator action elements
Section 37
AGD_USR.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
Application Note: The content required by this component is quite comprehensive and
broadly stated: in particular the content needs to address any of the mechanisms and
functions provided to the user to meet the functional requirements of the PP. It should
also contain warnings about actions that may typically be done by users that should not
be done on this specific TOE.
5.2.5 Life Cycle Support
5.2.5.1 ALC_FLR.1 Flaw Reporting Procedures
5.2.5.1.1 Developer action elements
ALC_FLR.1.1D The developer shall document the flaw remediation procedures.
5.2.5.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ALC_FLR.1.1C The flaw remediation procedures documentation shall describe the
procedures used to track all reported security flaws in each release of the
TOE.
ALC_FLR.1.2C The flaw remediation procedures shall require that a description of the
nature and effect of each security flaw be provided as well as the status
of finding a correction to the flaw.
ALC_FLR.1.3C The flaw remediation procedures shall require that corrective actions be
identified for each of the security flaws.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
50
ALC_FLR.1.4C The flaw remediation procedures documentation shall describe the
methods used to provide flaw information, corrections, and guidance on
corrective actions to TOE users.
5.2.5.1.3 Evaluator action elements
ALC_FLR.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
5.2.6 Tests
5.2.6.1 ATE_COV.1 Evidence of coverage.
5.2.6.1.1 Developer action elements
ATE_COV.1.1D The developer shall provide evidence of the test coverage.
5.2.6.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ATE_COV.1.1C The evidence of test coverage shall show the correspondence between the
test identified in the test documentation and the TSF as described in the
functional specification.
5.2.6.1.3 Evaluator action elements
ATE_COV.1.1.E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
5.2.6.2 ATE_FUN.1 Functional Testing
5.2.6.2.1 Developer action elements
ATE_FUN.1.1D The developer shall test the TSF and document the results.
ATE_FUN.1.2D The developer shall provide test documentation.
5.2.6.2.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ATE_FUN.1.1C The test documentation shall consist of test plans, test procedure
descriptions, expected test results, and the actual test results.
ATE_FUN.1.2C The test plans shall identify the security functions to be tested and
describe the goal of the tests to be performed.
ATE_FUN.1.3C The test procedures shall identify the test to be performed and describe
the scenarios for testing each security function. The scenarios shall
include any ordering dependencies on the results of other tests.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
51
ATE_FUN.1.4C The expected test results shall show the anticipated outputs from a
successful execution of the tests.
ATE_FUN.1.5C The test results from the developer execution of the tests shall
demonstrate that each tested security function behaved as specified.
5.2.6.2.3 Evaluator action elements
Section 38
ATE_FUN.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
5.2.6.3 ATE_IND.2 Independent Testing – Sample
5.2.6.3.1 Developer action elements
ATE_IND.2.1D The developer shall provide the TOE for testing.
5.2.6.3.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
ATE_IND.2.1C The TOE shall be suitable for testing.
ATE_IND.2.2C The developer shall provide an equivalent set of resources to those that
were used in the developer’s functional testing of the TSF.
5.2.6.3.3 Evaluator action elements
ATE_IND.2.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
ATE_IND.2.2E The evaluator shall test a subset of the TSF as appropriate to confirm
that the TOE operates as specified.
ATE_IND.2.3E The evaluator shall execute a sample of tests in the test documentation to
verify the developer test results.
Application Note: The choice of the subset to be tested and the sample of
tests executed by the evaluator is entirely at the discretion of the evaluator.
5.2.7 Vulnerability Assessment
5.2.7.1 AVA_SOF.1 Strength of TOE security function evaluation.
5.2.7.1.1 Developer action elements
AVA_SOF.1.1D The developer shall perform a strength of TOE security function
analysis for each mechanism identified in the ST as having a strength of
TOE security function claim.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
52
5.2.7.1.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
AVA_SOF.1.1C For each mechanism with a strength of TOE security function claim the
strength of TOE security function analysis shall show that it meets or
exceeds the minimum strength level defined in the PP/ ST.
AVA_SOF.1.2C For each mechanism with specific strength of TOE security function
claim the strength of TOE security function analysis shall show that it
meets or exceeds the specific strength of function metric defined in the
PP/ ST.
5.2.7.1.3 Evaluator action elements
AVA_SOF.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
AVA_SOF.1.2E The evaluator shall confirm that the strength claims are correct.
Application Note: The requirement applies to the authentication mechanism and any
other mechanism that relies on its strength to ensure confidentiality and/ or integrity
(e.g., encryption).
5.2.7.2 AVA_VLA.1 Developer vulnerability analysis
5.2.7.2.1 Developer action elements
AVA_VLA.1.1D The developer shall perform and document an analysis of the TOE
deliverables searching for obvious ways in which a user can violate the
TSP.
AVA_VLA.1.2D The developer shall document the disposition of the obvious
vulnerabilities.
5.2.7.2.2 Content and presentation of evidence elements
AVA_VLA.1.1C The documentation shall show, for all identified vulnerabilities, that the
vulnerability cannot be exploited in the intended environment for the
TOE.
5.2.7.2.3 Evaluator action elements
AVA_VLA.1.1E The evaluator shall confirm that the information provided meets all
requirements for the content and presentation of evidence.
AVA_VLA.1.2E The evaluator shall conduct penetration testing, building on the
developer vulnerability analysis, to ensure obvious vulnerabilities have
been addressed.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
53
Section 39
Application Note: The evaluator should consider the following with respect to the
search for obvious flaws:
a. Dependencies among functional components and potential inconsistencies in the
strength of unction among independent functions.
b. Potential inconsistencies between the TSP and the functional specification.
c. Potential gaps or inconsistencies in the HLD and potentially invalid assumptions
about supporting hardware, software, or firmware required by the TSF.
d. Potential gaps in the administrator guidance that enable the administrator to fail: a)
make effective use of TSF functions, b) to understands or take actions that need to
be performed, c) to install and / or configure the TOE correctly, and, d) to avoid
unintended interactions among security functions. In particular, Failure to describe
all security parameters under the administrator’s control and the effects of settings
of those parameters.
e. Potential gaps in user guidance that enable the user to fail to control functions and
privileges as required to maintain a secure processing environment. Potential
presence in the user guidance of information that facilitates exploitation of
vulnerabilities.
f. Open literature (e.g., CERT advisories, bug-trag mailing lists, etc.) that contains
information on vulnerabilities on the TSF should be consulted.
5.3 Security Requirements for the IT Environment
The IT environment consists of those administrative processes to ensure Personnel Security,
Communications Security, Physical Security, and Cyber Security requirements are met for the
TOE as well as the adjudication of varying Cyber security requirements for interconnected
systems or networks.
5.3.1 ENV_AMA.1 Malicious Access
5.3.1.1 ENV_AMA.1.1 Environmental controls are implemented to detect, deter, and
respond to malicious actions by authenticated users.
Application Note: Intrusion detection by other components does not include electronic
mail or electronic mail attachments that may execute malicious code upon opening.
5.3.2 ENV_AVA.1 Information Availability
5.3.2.1 ENV_AVA.1.1 Capabilities and resources are provided to allow the information
system user to perform data backup at the user’s discretion.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
54
5.3.2.2 ENV_AVA.1.2 User and information system data are available, or restorable, to
meet mission availability requirements. Periodic checking of
backup inventory and testing of the ability to restore information
is accomplished to validate mission availability requirements are
met.
5.3.3 ENV_ATH.1 Management of User Identifiers and Authenticators
5.3.3.1 ENV_ ATH.1.1 Authentication credentials shall be protected from unauthorized
access during creation, use, and handling.
5.3.3.2 ENV_ ATH.1.2 Authenticated user TOE access is disabled when the user leaves the
sponsoring organization, Access Authorization is terminated, loses
authorized access (for cause, changes in organization, etc), or upon
TOE detection of attempts to bypass security.
5.3.3.3 ENV_ ATH.1.3 Prior to reuse of an authenticated user identifier, all previous
access rights and privileges (including file accesses for that user
identifier) are removed from the TOE.
5.3.3.4 ENV_ ATH.1.4 Authenticated user access, contact information, rights, and
privileges, to include sponsor, Access Authorization, need-to-
know, means for off line contact, mailing address, are validated
annually.
Section 40
5.3.4 ENV_CLR.1 Clearing
5.3.4.1 ENV_CLR.1.1 The information system components and removable media are
cleared before the items can be reused in another system
environment with the same or different accreditation level as the
original system components or removable media.
5.3.5 ENV_EXM.1 Hardware and Software Examination
5.3.5.1 ENV_EXM.1.1 Information system hardware components are examined for
security impacts to the information system before use.
5.3.5.2 ENV_EXM.1.2 Information system software components are examined and tested
for security impacts to the information system before use.
5.3.6 ENV_FOR.1 Forensics
5.3.6.1 ENV_FOR.1.1 Procedures are established and documented to ensure the
identification, collection, and preservation of data needed to
analyze penetration reconstruction, on-going cyber attacks and/ or
failures
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
55
5.3.7 ENV_IDS.1Intrusion Detection
5.3.7.1 ENV_IDS.1.1 The site and network (when applicable) environment provides the
ability to detect low level, i.e., using methods readily available on
the Internet to attack known vulnerabilities, attacks on the hosts
and networks from outside the site and the results of such attacks
(e.g., corrupted system state), including measures to detect and
respond to unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
5.3.7.2 ENV_IDS.1.2 The site and network (when applicable) environment provides the
ability to detect low level, i.e., using readily available methods to
attack known vulnerabilities, attacks on the hosts and networks
from inside the site and the results of such attacks (e.g., corrupted
system state), including measures to detect and respond to
unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
5.3.7.3 ENV_IDS.1.3 The network (when applicable) environment provides the ability
to detect low level, i.e., using methods readily available on the
Internet to attack known vulnerabilities, attacks on the network
and its components, and the results of such attacks (e.g., corrupted
system state), including measures to detect and respond to
unauthorized attempts to penetrate or deny use.
5.3.8 ENV_INT.1 TOE Interface
5.3.8.1 ENV_INT.1.1 The information system environment must ensure that any
information flow control policies are enforced at the system (TOE)
external interfaces.
5.3.8.2 ENV_INT.1.2 The developers of the information system must ensure that the
information system security is not adversely affected by the
characteristics of the network(s) to which the information system
is interfaced.
5.3.9 ENV_MRK.1 Marking
5.3.9.1 ENV_ MRK.1.1 Each host, visual display, and output device will be marked with
the sensitivity label (level) of the most sensitive Information Group
the system is accredited to process, store, or transmit.
5.3.9.2 ENV_MRK.1.2 All system output is appropriately marked with the sensitivity
label (level) of the highest sensitivity of the Information Groups
that the system is accredited to operate with or with the sensitivity
label for the information printed. All media (paper, disks, zip
drives, removable disk drives, etc.) are reviewed for classification
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
56
and sensitivity and properly marked before release outside the
system boundary.
5.3.10 ENV_NON.1 Non-TOE Access
Section 41
5.3.10.1 ENV_NON.1.1 The electronic environment in which the TOE resides (e.g. IT
other than the information system) must provide the ability to
specify and manage user access rights to the TOE processing and
data resources (i.e. access authorization through the network),
supporting the organization’s security policy for access control.
5.3.10.2 ENV_NON.1.2 For resources not controlled by the information system, IT other
than the information system must prevent logical entry using
unsophisticated, technical methods, by persons without authority
for such access.
5.3.11 ENV_NOT.1 User Notification
5.3.11.1 ENV_NOT.1.1 All users are notified that they are subject to being monitored,
recorded, and audited through the use of an NNSA approved
warning text and positive acknowledgement by the user is
required before granting the user access to system resources.
5.3.12 ENV_NTK.1 Need-To-Know
5.3.12.1 ENV_NTK.1.1 Prior to their first access to information, each user’s need-to-know
is formally authorized by management, the data owner, or the
data-steward.
5.3.13 ENV_PHY.2 Physical Security and Physical Access
5.3.13.1 ENV_PHY.2.1 Access controls ensure that personnel granted unescorted physical
access to the information, the information system or human
readable media have the appropriate formal access approvals and
need-to-know.
5.3.13.2 ENV_PHY.2.3 Systems containing [assignment: Unclassified Mandatory
Protection information] shall, as a minimum, be protected by at
least one of the following [assignment: constantly attended or
under the control of a person that possesses proper authorization,
formal access approval, and need to know; in a manner described
for Unclassified Mandatory Protected information; or in a manner
to preclude unauthorized disclosure].
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
57
5.3.13.3 ENV_PHY.2.2 Physical attack that might compromise IT security on those parts
of the information system critical to security is deterred and
detected.
5.3.14 ENV_PRO.1 Information Protection
5.3.14.1 ENV_PRO.1.1 Information protection is required whenever [assignment:
Unclassified Mandatory Protection] information is to be
transmitted, carried to, or carried through areas or components
where individuals not authorized to have access to the information
may have unescorted physical or uncontrolled electronic access to
the information or communications media (e. g., outside the
system perimeter). One or more of [assignment: information
distributed only within an area approved for open storage of the
information; National Security Agency (NSA) - approved Type II
encryption mechanisms; DOE/NNSA approved encryption
mechanisms; or NNSA approved protected transmission systems].
5.3.15 ENV_RCV.1 System Recovery
5.3.15.1 ENV_RCV.1.1 All remote terminal access must be monitored when used for
system recovery operations.
5.3.16 ENV_REV.1 Media and Component Review
5.3.16.1 ENV_REV.1.1 All media (paper, disks, zip drives, removable disk drives, etc.) are
reviewed for sensitivity and properly marked before release
outside the system boundary.
5.3.17 ENV_RGT.1 User Access Rights and Privileges
5.3.17.1 ENV_ RGT.1.1Each user’s access rights and privileges are authorized, prior to
the user's first access to the TOE.
5.3.18 ENV_ROL.1 Security Roles
5.3.18.1 ENV_ROL.1.1 Other roles involved with security administration, such as DBMS
administration, are not performed by the same people performing
the CSSO and system administrator roles.
Section 42
5.3.18.2 ENV_ROL1.2 The same person does not perform the functions of CSSO and the
system administrator.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
58
5.3.19 ENV_TNG.1 User Training
5.3.19.1 ENV_TNG.1.1 All authenticated users are trained to understand applicable
information system-use policies, the approved use of the
information system, the vulnerabilities inherent in the operation of
the information system, and their cyber security responsibilities.
6. PP Application Notes
The Discretionary Access Control Policy, also referred to as DAC, is the basic policy that
MANDPP compliant systems and products enforce over users and resources. Whether a user is
granted a requested action, is determined by the TOE Security Policy (TSP) that is specified in
this profile in the context of Discretionary Access Control (DAC). The DAC policy is the set of
rules used to mediate user access to TOE protected objects and can be generally characterized as
a policy which requires the TOE to allow authorized users and authorized administrators to
control access to objects based on individual user identification. When the DAC policy rules are
invoked, the TOE is said to be mediating access to TOE protected objects. However, there may
be instances when the DAC policy is not invoked meaning that there may be objects residing in
the TOE that are not protected by the TSP. In these instances the TOE is said to not be mediating
access to a set of objects even though the TOE is executing a (possibly unauthorized) user
request.
The DAC policy consists of two types of rules: those that apply to the behavior of authorized
users (termed access rules) and those that apply to the behavior of authorized administrators
(termed authorization rules). If an authorized user is granted a request to operate on an object, the
user is said to have access to that object. There are numerous types of access; typical ones
include read access and write access, which allow the reading and writing of objects respectively.
If an authorized administrator is granted a requested service, the user is said to have
authorization to the requested service or object. As for access, there are numerous possible
authorizations. Typical authorizations include auditor authorization that allows an administrator
to view audit records and execute audit tools and DAC override authorization that allows an
administrator to override object access controls to administer the system.
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
59
7. Rationale
7.1 Security Objectives Rationale
Table 1. Policies, Threats, and Assumptions by Objective
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.ACCESS T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_NON_TOE,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.STEGANOGRAPHY
P.PERSONNEL,
P.AUTH_MGMT,
P.NTK
A.COOP
O.ACCESS_FORMAL T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.SPOOFING,
T.STEGANOGRAPHY
P.PERSONNEL,
P.AUTH_MGMT,
P.NTK
A.COOP
O.ACCESS_HISTORY T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
Section 43
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.SPOOFING
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.MONITORING
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
60
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.ACCESS_MALICIOUS T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.PHYSICAL,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED
P.PERSONNEL,
P.AUTH_MGMT,
P.NTK
A.COOP
O.AUDIT_BASIC T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.FLAW_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_RECIEVE,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_SEND,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_TRANSACTION,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.RECORD_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRACEABLE_TOE,
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.MONITORING,
P.FORENSICS,
P.UNIQUE_ID
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
61
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.AUDIT_FAILURE T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPRINGBOARD
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.MONITORING,
P.FORENSICS
O.AUDIT_PROTECTION T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_TOE,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_NON_TOE,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.FLAW_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.TRACEABLE_TOE,
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.MONITORING,
P.FORENSICS
A.COOP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
62
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.AUDIT_REVIEW T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CONFIDENTIALITY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.FLAW_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_RECIEVE,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_SEND,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_TRANSACTION,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRACEABLE_TOE,
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.MONITORING,
P.FORENSICS
O.AUTHENT_EXPOSE T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.LINK_OTHER
P.NTK,
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.AUTH_MGMT,
P.DATA_AVAILABILI
TY
O.AUTHORIZATION T.SPRINGBOARD P.NTK,
P.UNIQUE_ID
A.COOP
O.AUTHORIZE_NON_TOE T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.OPERATE,
T.SPRINGBOARD
P.COMPOSITION A.COOP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
63
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.AVAILABILITY_LOW T.CRASH,
T.MAINTENANCE
P.ALT_INFRASTRUC
TURE,
P.CONOPS,
P.DATA_AVAILABILI
TY,
P.SURVIVE
Section 44
O.CLEARING T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.SECRET_OTHER,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
P.RESIDUAL_DATA,
P.NTK
O.CREDENTIAL_PROTECTION T.LINK_OTHER,
T.SPRINGBOARD
P.CREDENTIAL_PRO
TECTION
O.DATA_BACKUP_BASIC T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_NON_TOE,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE,
T.CRASH,
T.DELETE_UNINTENTIONAL,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.INTEGRITY_OTHER,
T.MAINTENANCE,
T.MALICIOUS_CODE,
T.MODIFY_OTHER,
T.OPERATE,
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED
P.DATA_AVAILABILI
TY,
P.SURVIVE,
P.SYS_RECOVERY
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
64
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.DATA_CHANGES_DETERRED T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
TADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.INTEGRITY_OTHER,
T.MODIFY_OTHER,
T.NON_REPUDIATION_TRANSACTION,
T.OPERATE,
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.UNAUTHORIZED_MALICIOUS_SOFTW
ARE
P.DATA_ASSURANC
E
O.DETECT_EXTERNAL_BASIC T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.CAPTURE,
T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.ENTRY_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRACEABLE_NON_TOE,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
P.IDS
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
65
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.DETECT_HOST_BASIC T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.CAPTURE,
T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.ENTRY_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.FLAW_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
P.IDS
O.DETECT_NETWORK_BASIC T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.CAPTURE,
T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.ENTRY_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER
P.IDS
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
66
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.DETECT_SITE_BASIC T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.CAPTURE,
T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.ENTRY_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.RECORD_EVENT_NON_TOE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
P.IDS
O.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
Section 45
T.OPERATE
P.PHYSICAL
P.NTK
A.COOP
O.ENTRY_NON_TOE T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.LINK_OTHER
P.COMPOSITION A.COOP
O.ENTRY_TOE T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER
P.NTK,
P.MALICIOUS_CODE
A.COOP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
67
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.FORENSICS_PROC T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_NON_TOE,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.ERROR_USER,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.RECORD_EVENT_TOE,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRACEABLE_TOE,
T.TRAPDOOR_BENIGN_ADMIN,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_CODE
P.FORENSICS
O.HARDWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM T.COVERT_OTHER,
T.INSTALL,
T.SIGNAL_SYSTEM_DEVELOPER,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER
P.CONFIG_MGMT,
P.MALICIOUS_CODE,
P.DUE_CARE
A.PROTECT
O.ID_DISABLE T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.SPOOFING
P.NTK,
P.DENY_ACCESS
O.ID_REMOVAL T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.SPOOFING
P.NTK,
P.DENY_ACCESS
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
68
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.ID_REVALIDATION T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.IMPERSON_OTHER
P.UNIQUE_ID,
P.DENY_ACCESS
O.INFO_FLOW T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.LOSS_SOFTWARE,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_SOFTWARE
P.NTK,
,
P.COMPOSITION,
P.INFO_FLOW,
A.PEER
O.INTEGRITY_LOW T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.INTEGRITY_OTHER,
T.MODIFY_OTHER,
T.OPERATE,
T.UNAUTHORIZED_MALICIOUS_SOFTW
ARE
P.DATA_ASSURANC
E,
P.NTK
A.COOP
O.MALICIOUS_CODE T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.INSTALL,
T.MALICIOUS_CODE,
T.OPERATE,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_CODE,
T.UNAUTHORIZED_MALICIOUS_SOFTW
ARE
P.MALICIOUS_CODE A.PROTECT
O.MANAGE_TOE T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.AUTHENTICATION_NETWORK,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.OPERATE,
T.TAMPER
P.LEAST_PRIV
P.SYS_TESTING
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
69
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.MARK_COMPONENT T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.SECRET_OTHER
P.MEDIA_MARKING,
P.MEDIA_REVIEW,
P.NTK
O.MARK_OUTPUT T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.EXPORT_OTHER,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.OPERATE,
T.SECRET_OT HER,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.STEGANOGRAPHY
P.MEDIA_MARKING,
P.MEDIA_REVIEW,
P.NTK
O.MEDIA_REVIEW T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.EXPORT_OTHER,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.SECRET_OTHER,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.STEGANOGRAPHY
P.MEDIA_MARKING,
P.MEDIA_REVIEW,
P.NTK
O.NETWORK_INTERFACE T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.INSTALL,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED
P.COMPOSITION,
A.PEER
O.NTK_NNSA T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
Section 46
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.TAMPER
P.NTK A.COOP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
70
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.PHYS_MANDATED T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.INTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OBSERVE_OTHER,
T.PHYSICAL,
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK,
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED
P.PHYSICAL
O.PHYSICAL T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.INSTALL,
T.PHYSICAL,
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK,
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE,
T.SPOOFING,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TAMPER,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED
P.PHYSICAL A.CONNECT,
A.LOCATE,
A.PROTECT
O.PHYSICAL_PROTECTION T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.PHYSICAL_ATTACK,
T.SABOTAGE_DATA/SOFTWARE
P.PHYSICAL
O.RECOVERY_CONTROLLED T.CRASH,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED
P.SYS_RECOVERY
O.REPLAY T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TOE,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.LINK_OTHER,
T.OPERATE,
T.REPLAY,
T.SECRET_OTHER,
T.SPRINGBOARD
P.NTK,
P.SYS_ASSURANCE
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
71
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.RESIDUAL_PROTECTION T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.LINK_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OPERATE,
T.SECRET_OTHER
P.RESIDUAL_DATA,
P.NTK
O.RESOURCE_USAGE T.DENY_OTHER,
T.OPERATE
P.DATA_AVAILABILI
TY
O.ROLES_OTHER_SECURITY T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE,
T.CONFIGURATION_ADMIN,
T.OPERATE
P.ROLE_SEPARATIO
N
O.SEC_FUNC_MANAGEMENT T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.TAMPER
P.NTK,
P.ROLE_SEPARATIO
N
O.SESSION_ESTABLISHMENT T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ENTRY_OTHER,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
T.ENTRY_TOE
P.SESSION_CTL A.COOP
O.SOFTWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM T.FLAWED_CODE,
T.INSTALL,
T.SYSTEM_CORRUPTED,
T.TOE_CORRUPTED,
T.TRAPDOOR_MALICIOUS_CODE
P.COMPOSITION,
P.MALICIOUS_CODE
A.PROTECT
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
72
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.TRAINING T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_UNDETECTED,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.ACCESS_NON_TECHNICAL,
T.ADMIN_ERROR,
T.DELETE_UNINTENTIONAL,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OBSERVE_TOE,
T.OBSERVE_NON_TOE,
T.SOCIAL_ENGINEERING,
T.TRAPDOOR_BEGIN_ADMIN,
T.UNAUTHORIZED_MALICIOUS_SOFTW
ARE,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_MALICIOUS_SOFTW
ARE,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE
P.TRAINING,
P.RISKASSESS,
P.DUE_CARE,
P.SURVIVE,
P.TRUSTED_USER,
P.WFA
A.TRAINED_
ADM,
A.MANAGE
O.TRANS_SEC_UNCLASS T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ACCESS_MALICIOUS,
T.CAPTURE,
T.EAVESDROPPING,
T.LINK_OTHER,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.PHYSICAL,
T.SECRET_OTHER
P.CRYPTOGRAPY,
P.NTK,
P.DATA_ASSURANC
E,
P.SYS_ASSURANCE
O.TRUSTED_PATH T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.AUTHENTICATION_NETWORK
P.NTK,
P.SYS_ASSURANCE,
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.CREDENTIAL_PRO
TECTION,
P.STRONG_AUTHEN
TICATION
O.TSF_DOMAIN_SEPARATION T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_NON_TOE,
T.AUDIT_CORRUPTED_TOE,
T.CONFIDENTIALITY_NON_TOE,
T.CONFIDENTIALITY_TOE
P.SYS_ASSURANCE,
P.PROTCTD_DOMAI
N
O.UNESCORT_ACCESS_UNCLASS T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.OBSERVE_OTHER,
T.UNINTENTIONAL_DISCLOSURE,
T.PHYSICAL
P.NTK,
P.PHYSICAL,
P.CONFIG_MGMT,
P.DATA_AVAILABILI
TY,
P.PERSONNEL,
A.COOP
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
73
Section 47
Objective Name Threat Policy Assumptions
O.USER_INACTIVITY T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.INSTALL,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.SECRET_OTHER,
T.SPRINGBOARD
P.NTK,
P.ACCOUNTABILITY,
P.KNOWN,
P.DENY_ACCESS,
P.DUE_CARE,
P.DATA_ASSURANC
E
O.USER_LOCKING T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.INSTALL,
T.MASQUERADE_AUTHORIZED_USER,
T.SECRET_OTHER,
T.SPRINGBOARD,
P.NTK,
P.ACCOUNTABILTY,
P.KNOWN,
P.DENY_ACCESS,
P.DUE_CARE,
P.DATA_ASSURANC
E
O.WARNING_BANNER T.ABUSE_ADMIN,
T.ABUSE_OTHER,
T.ABUSE_USER,
T.ACCESS_TOE,
T.ATTACK_OTHER,
T.ENTRY_TOE,
T.ENTRY_SOPHISTICATED,
T.OPERATE
P.WFA,
P.WARNING_BANNE
R
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
74
7.2 Security Requirements Rationale
Table 2. Functional Components Implementing Objectives
Objective Functional Component
O.ACCESS ENV_RGT.1
O.ACCESS_FORMAL ENV_NTK.1
O.ACCESS_HISTORY FTA_TAH.1
O.ACCESS_MALICIOUS FIA_SOS.1, ENV_AMA.1
O.AUDIT_BASIC FAU_GEN.1, FAU_GEN.2, FAU_SEL.1, FPT_AMT.1, FPT_STM.1, FPT_TST.1
O.AUDIT_FAILURE FAU_STG.3, FAU_STG.4
O.AUDIT_PROTECTION FAU_SAR.2, FAU_STG.2, FPT_TST.1, ENV_FOR.1
O.AUDIT_REVIEW FAU_SAA.4, FAU_SAR.1, FAU_SAR.3
O.AUTHENT_EXPOSE FIA_UAU.7
O.AUTHORIZATION FDP_ACC.2, FDP_ACF.1, FIA_ATD.1, FIA_UAU.1, FIA_UID.1, FPT_TST.1
O.AUTHORIZE_NON_TOE ENV_NON.1
O.AVAILABILITY_LOW ENV_RCV.1
O.CLEARING ENV_CLR.1
O.CREDENTIAL_PROTECTION FIA_UAU.7, FMT_MTD.1, ENV_ATH.1
O.DATA_BACKUP_BASIC ENV_AVA.1
O.DATA_CHANGES_DETERRED FDP_DAU.1, FDP_SDI.2
O.DETECT_EXTERNAL_BASIC ENV_IDS.1
O.DETECT_HOST_BASIC FAU_SAA.4
O.DETECT_NETWORK_BASIC ENV_IDS.1
O.DETECT_SITE_BASIC ENV_IDS.1
O.ENTRY_NON_TECHNICAL ENV_NON.1
O.ENTRY_NON_TOE ENV_NON.1
O.ENTRY_TOE FIA_UAU.1, FIA_UAU.7, FIA_UID.1
O.FORENSICS_PROC ENV_FOR.1
O.HARDWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM ENV_EXM.1
O.ID_DISABLE FIA_AFL.1, FMT_REV.1, ENV_ATH.1
O.ID_REMOVAL FMT_REV.1, FMT_SMR.2, ENV_ATH.1
O.ID_REVALIDATION ENV_ATH.1
O.INFO_FLOW FDP_ACC.2, FDP_IFC.1, FDP_IFF.1, ENV_INT.1
O.INTEGRITY_LOW FDP_ACF.1
O.MALICIOUS_CODE FAU_ARP.1
O.MANAGE_TOE FMT_MOF.1, FMT_MSA.1, FMT_MSA.3, FMT_MTD.1, FMT_REV.1, FMT_SMR.2
O.MARK_COMPONENT ENV_MRK.1
O.MARK_OUTPUT ENV_MRK.1
O.MEDIA_REVIEW ENV_MRK.1, ENV_REV.1
O.NETWORK_INTERFACE ENV_INT.1
O.NTK_NNSA FDP_ACC.2, FMT_MTD.1, FMT_REV.1, FPT_TST.1, FMT_SMR.2
O.PHYS_MANDATED ENV_PHY.1
O.PHYSICAL ENV_PHY.1
O.PHYSICAL_PROTECTION ENV_PHY.1
UNCLASSIFIED MANDATORY PROTECTION PROTECTION PROFILE VERSION 1.3
75
O.RECOVERY_CONTROLLED FPT_RCV.1, AGD_ADM.1 ENV_RCV.1
O.REPLAY ENV_IDS.1, ENV_INT.1, FAU_SAA.4
O.RESIDUAL_PROTECTION FDP_RIP.1
O.RESOURCE_USAGE FRU_RSA.1
O.ROLES_OTHER_SECURITY FMT_SMR.2, ENV_ROL.1
O.SEC_FUNC_MANAGEMENT FIA_ATD.1, FIA_USB.1, FMT_MOF.1; FMT_MSA.1, FMT_MSA.3, FMT_MTD.1, FMT_REV.1,
FMT_SMR.2, FPT_AMT.1, FPT_TST.1
O.SESSION_ESTABLISHMENT FIA_AFL.1, FIA_UAU.1, FIA_UID.1, FPT_TST.1, FTA_MCS.1, FTA_TSE.1
O.SOFTWARE_EXAM_MINIMUM ENV_EXM.1
O.TRAINING ENV_TNG.1
O.TRANS_SEC_UNCLASS FCS_COP.1, FDP_ITC.1, FCS_CKM.4, FMT_MSA.2, ENV_PRO.1
O.TRUSTED_PATH FTP_TRP.1
O.TSF_DOMAIN_SEPARATION FPT_AMT.1, FPT_RVM.1, FPT_SEP.2
O.UNESCORT_ACCESS_UNCLASS ENV_PHY.1
O.USER_INACTIVITY FTA_SSL.1
O.USER_LOCKING FTA_SSL.2
O.WARNING_BANNER FTA_TAB.1, ENV_NOT.1