|
I'm sorry I was not correct in the previous
message that is saying:
-------------------------------------
"Some ST
author's are putting 'list' in other functional components too
(such as FDP_ACC/IFC)
insted of using the
iteration.
So, I do not think this is a
problem only for FCS_COP."
-------------------------------------
I was wrong. The issue is only for
FCS_COP.
Isn't it better to add guidance in the CC part2 annex FCS_COP ?
Yokota
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: FCS_COP assignment
I agree with Gary's answer, considering the
actual usage we could see in the disclosed STs.
However, we can not see the
conditions of the 'acceptance' in the current CC, can
we?
Some ST author's are putting 'list'
in other functional components too (such as FDP_ACC/IFC)
insted of using the
iteration.
So, I do not think this is a
problem only for FCS_COP.
Where and by what condition is the
listing in a component equivalent to the iteration
sould be crarified.
Is it OK for me to submit RI to reflect
the answer in the CC manuals ?
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002
11:29 PM
Subject: Re: FCS_COP assignment
In FCS_COP.1.1, the number of algorithms listed may be greater
than 1. This would be the case when the TOE is to implement multiple
instances of the cryptographic functions using different algorithms.
This is the equivalent of iterating FCS_COP.1 for each algorithm. Since
the only change from iteration to iteration would, in this case, be the
algorithm - a list of algorithms in one instance of FCS_COP.1 makes
sense.
The above is acceptable only where each algorithm is used in the
TOE implements all of the functions listed. If a given algorithm is to
implement only some of the functions, then actual iteration is required,
repeating FCS_COP.1 for each algorithm and listing the functions to be
performed using that algorithm.
Cheers,
Gary
At 08:37 AM
11/20/02, YOKOTA HIROFUMI wrote:
Question:
When we need to
fill FCS_COP.1.1 with cryptographic algorithm,
I believe, we should
remind that the assignment is
"cryptographic algorithm", not "list of
cryptographic algorithm ".
However, many ST authors are likely to set
there "list of cryptographic
algorithm "
(ex. RSA, SHA-1,
MD5).
Some evaluated STs are written similarly.
When we
evaluate customer's STs, should we guide them that
"list of cryptographic
algorithm " would not pass the evaluation?
Or, is this not a
problem?
Hirofumi Yokota
**************************************************************************
*
Opinions expressed are not intended to reflect an official
position
**************************************************************************
* Gary Stoneburner
* Computer Security
Division, National Institute of Standards & Technology
* 100 Bureau
Drive, Stop 8930, Gaithersburg, MD
20877-8930
* Phone:
301-975-5394, FAX: 301-948-0279, Email: Stoneburner@nist.gov
**************************************************************************
|