TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V.
Head Office:
Westervoortsedijk 73
NL-6827 AV Arnhem
P.O. Box 2220
NL-6802 CE Arnhem
The Netherlands
Location Leek:
Eiberkamp 10
NL-9351 VT Leek
P.O. Box 37
NL-9350 AA Leek
The Netherlands
info@nl.tuv.com
www.tuv.com/nl
Tel. +31 (0)88 888 7 888
Fax +31 (0)88 888 7 879
TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V. is a
registered company at the
Netherlands Chamber of Commerce
(KVK), under number 27288788.
VAT number: NL815820380B01
IBAN: NL61DEUT0265155096
Version
2022-01
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
Certification Report
Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and
AnyConnect
Sponsor and developer: Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Evaluation facility: SGS Brightsight B.V.
Brassersplein 2
2612 CT Delft
The Netherlands
Report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR
Report version: 1
Project number: 0259553
Author(s): Kjartan Jæger Kvassnes
Date: 07 October 2022
Number of pages: 12
Number of appendices: 0
Reproduction of this report is authorised only if the report is reproduced in its entirety.
Page: 2/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
CONTENTS
Foreword 3
Recognition of the Certificate 4
International recognition 4
European recognition 4
1 Executive Summary 5
2 Certification Results 6
2.1 Identification of Target of Evaluation 6
2.2 Security Policy 6
2.3 Assumptions and Clarification of Scope 7
2.3.1 Assumptions 7
2.3.2 Clarification of scope 7
2.4 Architectural Information 7
2.5 Documentation 8
2.6 IT Product Testing 8
2.6.1 Testing approach and depth 8
2.6.2 Independent penetration testing 8
2.6.3 Test configuration 8
2.6.4 Test results 9
2.7 Reused Evaluation Results 9
2.8 Evaluated Configuration 9
2.9 Evaluation Results 9
2.10 Comments/Recommendations 10
3 Security Target 11
4 Definitions 11
5 Bibliography 12
Page: 3/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
Foreword
The Netherlands Scheme for Certification in the Area of IT Security (NSCIB) provides a third-party
evaluation and certification service for determining the trustworthiness of Information Technology (IT)
security products. Under this NSCIB, TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V. has the task of issuing
certificates for IT security products, as well as for protection profiles and sites.
Part of the procedure is the technical examination (evaluation) of the product, protection profile or site
according to the Common Criteria assessment guidelines published by the NSCIB. Evaluations are
performed by an IT Security Evaluation Facility (ITSEF) under the oversight of the NSCIB Certification
Body, which is operated by TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V. in cooperation with the Ministry of the
Interior and Kingdom Relations.
An ITSEF in the Netherlands is a commercial facility that has been licensed by TÜV Rheinland
Nederland B.V. to perform Common Criteria evaluations; a significant requirement for such a licence is
accreditation to the requirements of ISO Standard 17025 “General requirements for the accreditation
of calibration and testing laboratories”.
By awarding a Common Criteria certificate, TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V. asserts that the product or
site complies with the security requirements specified in the associated (site) security target, or that
the protection profile (PP) complies with the requirements for PP evaluation specified in the Common
Criteria for Information Security Evaluation. A (site) security target is a requirements specification
document that defines the scope of the evaluation activities.
The consumer should review the (site) security target or protection profile, in addition to this
certification report, to gain an understanding of any assumptions made during the evaluation, the IT
product's intended environment, its security requirements, and the level of confidence (i.e., the
evaluation assurance level) that the product or site satisfies the security requirements stated in the
(site) security target.
Reproduction of this report is authorised only if the report is reproduced in its entirety.
Page: 4/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
Recognition of the Certificate
The presence of the Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement (CCRA) and the SOG-IS logos on the
certificate indicates that this certificate is issued in accordance with the provisions of the CCRA and
the SOG-IS Mutual Recognition Agreement (SOG-IS MRA) and will be recognised by the participating
nations.
International recognition
The CCRA was signed by the Netherlands in May 2000 and provides mutual recognition of certificates
based on the Common Criteria (CC). Since September 2014 the CCRA has been updated to provide
mutual recognition of certificates based on cPPs (exact use) or STs with evaluation assurance
components up to and including EAL2+ALC_FLR.
For details of the current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes, see
http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org.
European recognition
The SOG-IS MRA Version 3, effective since April 2010, provides mutual recognition in Europe of
Common Criteria and ITSEC certificates at a basic evaluation level for all products. A higher
recognition level for evaluation levels beyond EAL4 (respectively E3-basic) is provided for products
related to specific technical domains. This agreement was signed initially by Finland, France,
Germany, The Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Italy joined the SOG-IS
MRA in December 2010.
For details of the current list of signatory nations, approved certification schemes and the list of
technical domains for which the higher recognition applies, see https://www.sogis.eu.
Page: 5/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
1 Executive Summary
This Certification Report states the outcome of the Common Criteria security evaluation of the Cisco
Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect. The developer of the Cisco
Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect is Cisco Systems, Inc. located in San
Jose, USA and they also act as the sponsor of the evaluation and certification. A Certification Report
is intended to assist prospective consumers when judging the suitability of the IT security properties of
the product for their particular requirements.
The TOE is a distributed system of multiple software components, which together provide firewall and
VPN capabilities and centralized management. The TOE is comprised of Cisco Firepower Threat
Defense (FTD) software running on Cisco Firepower security appliances that provide the firewall and
VPN gateway functionality, and Firepower Management Center (FMC) software running on Cisco
Firepower appliances that provide centralized management, and the AnyConnect Secure Mobility
Client providing remote-access VPN functionality.
The TOE has been evaluated by SGS Brightsight B.V. located in Delft, The Netherlands. The
evaluation was completed on 22 September 2022 with the approval of the ETR. The certification
procedure has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Netherlands Scheme for
Certification in the Area of IT Security [NSCIB].
The scope of the evaluation is defined by the security target [ST], which identifies assumptions made
during the evaluation, the intended environment for the Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4
with FMC and AnyConnect, the security requirements, and the level of confidence (evaluation
assurance level) at which the product is intended to satisfy the security requirements. Consumers of
the Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect are advised to verify that
their own environment is consistent with the security target, and to give due consideration to the
comments, observations and recommendations in this certification report.
The results documented in the evaluation technical report [ETR]
1
for this product provide sufficient
evidence that the TOE meets the EAL4 augmented (EAL4+) assurance requirements for the evaluated
security functionality. This assurance level is augmented with ALC_FLR.2 (Flaw reporting procedures).
The evaluation was conducted using the Common Methodology for Information Technology Security
Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 5 [CEM] for conformance to the Common Criteria for Information
Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 5 [CC] (Parts I, II and III).
TÜV Rheinland Nederland B.V., as the NSCIB Certification Body, declares that the evaluation meets
all the conditions for international recognition of Common Criteria Certificates and that the product will
be listed on the NSCIB Certified Products list. Note that the certification results apply only to the
specific version of the product as evaluated.
1
The Evaluation Technical Report contains information proprietary to the developer and/or the
evaluator, and is not available for public review.
Page: 6/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
2 Certification Results
2.1 Identification of Target of Evaluation
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) for this evaluation is the Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4
with FMC and AnyConnect from Cisco Systems, Inc. located in San Jose, USA.
The TOE is comprised of the following main components:
Delivery
item type
Identifier Version
Software
FMC 6.4
FXOS 2.6
FTD 6.4
AnyConnect 4.10
To ensure secure usage a set of guidance documents is provided, together with the Cisco Firepower
Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect. For details, see section 2.5 “Documentation” of
this report.
2.2 Security Policy
The TOE is comprised of several security features including stateful traffic firewall and VPN gateway.
Each of the security features identified above consists of several security functionalities, as identified
below.
 Security Audit
o The TOE can audit events related to cryptographic functionality, identification and
authentication, and administrative actions.
 Traffic Flow Control
o The TOE provides stateful traffic firewall functionality including IP address-based filtering (for
IPv4 and IPv6) to address the issues associated with unauthorized disclosure of information,
inappropriate access to services, misuse of services, disruption or denial of services, and
network-based reconnaissance.
 Identification and Authentication
o The TOE performs multiple types of authentication: device-level authentication of the remote
device (VPN peers); authentication of VPN clients (FTD authenticating AnyConnect clients);
and user authentication for the authorized administrator of the TOE.
 Security Management
o The TOE provides secure administrative services for management of general TOE
configuration and the security functionality provided by the TOE.
 Protection of the TSF
o The TOE protects against interference and tampering by untrusted subjects by implementing
identification, authentication, and access controls to limit configuration to authorized
administrators.
 TOE Access
o The TOE disconnects sessions that have been idle too long and can be configured to deny
sessions based on IP, time, and day, and to NAT external IPs of connecting VPN clients to
internal network addresses.
Page: 7/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
 Trusted Path/Channels
o The TOE supports establishing trusted paths between itself and remote administrators using
SSHv2 for CLI access, and TLS/HTTPS for GUI access. The TOE supports use of TLS for
connections with remote syslog servers (FTD supports syslog over TLS).
2.3 Assumptions and Clarification of Scope
2.3.1 Assumptions
The assumptions defined in the Security Target are not covered by the TOE itself. These aspects lead
to specific Security Objectives to be fulfilled by the TOE-Environment. For detailed information on the
security objectives that must be fulfilled by the TOE environment, see section 4.2 of the [ST].
2.3.2 Clarification of scope
The evaluation did not reveal any threats to the TOE that are not countered by the evaluated security
functions of the product.
2.4 Architectural Information
The TOE consists of software images (including operating systems and applications) and a software
client application. The TOE includes the Cisco FMC, FTD, MIO, and the Cisco AnyConnect VPN
client.
The logical architecture can be depicted as follows:
The figure shown directly above includes the following:
 TOE components: FMC, FTD, MIO, and AnyConnect
 VPN Peer: Another instance of FTD, or a non-TOE peer (Operational Environment)
 Management Workstation (Operational Environment)
 AAA (RADIUS) server (Operational Environment)
 Certificate Authority CA / OCSP Responder (Operational Environment)
 Syslog server (Operational Environment)
Page: 8/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
 NTP server (Operational Environment)
2.5 Documentation
The following documentation is provided with the product by the developer to the customer:
Identifier Version
Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect
Common Criteria Operational User Guidance and Preparative Procedures,
dated August 5, 2022
1.0
2.6 IT Product Testing
Testing (depth, coverage, functional tests, independent testing): The evaluators examined the
developer’s testing activities documentation and verified that the developer has met their testing
responsibilities.
2.6.1 Testing approach and depth
Testing of the Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect is provided by a
set of individual test plans. These tests demonstrate the security relevant behaviour of the Cisco
Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect.
Testing is performed manually and includes both positive and negative testing. Black box testing is
performed using the external TSFIs. For the most part, the API interfaces are tested using the
corresponding GUI and CLI interfaces that utilize the API. The developer provided a matrix describing
the test cases for each TSFI, the corresponding subsystems and modules.
Although the vendor has defined quite a lot of both positive and negative tests for all the TSFIs, the
evaluator defined additional independent tests either to cover more scenarios or to gain extra
assurance from existing test cases.
2.6.2 Independent penetration testing
To identify potential vulnerabilities the evaluator performed the following activities:
 The first step of the vulnerability analysis was the identification of areas of concern (as defined in
[CEM] and the CWE database, an open source publicly maintained dictionary of software
weaknesses).
o The areas of concern were identified by the evaluator using the CWE generic weaknesses
enumeration database version 3.1 as inspiration and the [CEM, Appendix B].
o Examples of areas of concern are Accessibility, Cryptography, SecureChannel,
 Collecting possible vulnerabilities from the design assessment by posing security questions
inspired by generic weaknesses separately for all security implementations of the TOE.
 Collecting possible vulnerabilities from applicable attack lists and public vulnerability search.
 These security relevant questions were then translated into TOE-specific possible vulnerabilities.
 The evaluator determined whether a possible vulnerability was removed or sufficiently mitigated
by the TOE implementation/environment evidence. If yes, the possible vulnerability is considered
as solved, otherwise it is uniquely labelled as potential vulnerability. Potential vulnerabilities were
then addressed in the context of penetration tests and/or further code review.
The total test effort expended by the evaluators was 12 days. During that test campaign, 100% of the
total time was spent on logical tests.
2.6.3 Test configuration
The configuration of the sample used for independent evaluator testing and penetration testing was
the same as described in the [ST].
The TOE was deployed in an operational environment using the following:
Page: 9/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
Identifier Product name Firmware
FTD
2
Firepower Threat Defence 6.4.0.15 (on FTD FP 1100)
6.4.0.15 (on FTD FP 2100)
6.4.0.15 (on FTD FP 4100)
FMC Firepower Management Center 6.4.0.15 (on FMC 4600)
AC AnyConnect Secure Mobility
Client
4.10.05111 (on Windows 10)
FXOS Firepower Extensible Operating
System
2.6.1.254 (on FTD FP 1100)
2.6.1.254 (on FTD FP 2100)
2.6.1.254 (on FTD FP 4100)
MIO
3
Management Input Output 2.6.1.254
Note: that the ST only claims the first two digits of the software versions, the last two digits only refers
to a maintenance release number and a patch build number, respectively.
2.6.4 Test results
The testing activities, including configurations, procedures, test cases, expected results and observed
results are summarised in the [ETR], with references to the documents containing the full details.
The developer’s tests and the independent functional tests produced the expected results, giving
assurance that the TOE behaves as specified in its [ST] and functional specification.
No exploitable vulnerabilities were found with the independent penetration tests.
The algorithmic security level of cryptographic functionality has not been rated in this certification
process, but the current consensus on the algorithmic security level in the open domain, i.e., from the
current best cryptanalytic attacks published, has been taken into account.
2.7 Reused Evaluation Results
There is no reuse of evaluation results in this certification.
2.8 Evaluated Configuration
The TOE is defined uniquely by its name and version number Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD)
6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect. Further details of the TOE components are provided in [ST], chapter
1.3.2 table 3.
2.9 Evaluation Results
The evaluation lab documented their evaluation results in the [ETR], which references an ASE
Intermediate Report and other evaluator documents.
The verdict of each claimed assurance requirement is “Pass”.
Based on the above evaluation results the evaluation lab concluded the Cisco Firepower Threat
Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect, to be CC Part 2 conformant, CC Part 3 conformant,
2
Depending on which underlying hardware platforms are used for FTD in the deployed TOE
configuration, the deployed TOE will include one or more builds of FXOS. A minimally-featured
build of FXOS runs the FTD applications on all platforms (1k, 2k, and on the SM in 4k/9k). A more
fully-featured build of FXOS is only present on the 4k/9k platforms and runs in the chassis
Supervisor Engine that is not present on the 1k/2k platforms.
3
To help distinguish between the FXOS builds this document will refer to the FXOS build on the
supervisor engine as “MIO” (Management Input/Output), and “FTD” will refer to the FXOS build
that loads the FTD applications and also to the FTD applications themselves.
Page: 10/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
and to meet the requirements of EAL 4 augmented with ALC_FLR.2. This implies that the product
satisfies the security requirements specified in Security Target [ST].
2.10 Comments/Recommendations
The user guidance as outlined in section 2.5 “Documentation” contains necessary information about
the usage of the TOE. Certain aspects of the TOE’s security functionality, in particular the
countermeasures against attacks, depend on accurate conformance to the user guidance of both the
software and the hardware part of the TOE. There are no particular obligations or recommendations
for the user apart from following the user guidance. Please note that the documents contain relevant
details concerning the resistance against certain attacks.
In addition, all aspects of assumptions, threats and policies as outlined in the Security Target not
covered by the TOE itself must be fulfilled by the operational environment of the TOE.
The customer or user of the product shall consider the results of the certification within his system risk
management process. For the evolution of attack methods and techniques to be covered, the
customer should define the period of time until a re-assessment for the TOE is required and thus
requested from the sponsor of the certificate.
The strength of the cryptographic algorithms and protocols was not rated in the course of this
evaluation. This specifically applies to the following proprietary or non-standard algorithms, protocols
and implementations: <none>.
Page: 11/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
3 Security Target
The Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect Security Target, Version
1.0, 5 August 2022 [ST] is included here by reference.
4 Definitions
This list of acronyms and definitions contains elements that are not already defined by the CC or CEM:
AC AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
CWE Common Weakness Enumeration
FMC Firepower Management Center
FTD Firepower Threat Defense
FXOS Firepower Extensible Operating System
IT Information Technology
ITSEF IT Security Evaluation Facility
JIL Joint Interpretation Library
MIO Management Input Output
NSCIB Netherlands Scheme for Certification in the area of IT Security
PP Protection Profile
TOE Target of Evaluation
Page: 12/12 of report number: NSCIB-CC-0259553-CR, dated 07 October 2022
®
TÜV,
TUEV
and
TUV
are
registered
trademarks.
Any
use
or
application
requires
prior
approval.
5 Bibliography
This section lists all referenced documentation used as source material in the compilation of this
report.
[CC] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Parts I, II
and III, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017
[CEM] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017
[ETR] Evaluation Technical Report “Cisco Firepower 6.4" – EAL4+, 22-RPT-898,
Version 2.0, 24 August 2022
[NSCIB] Netherlands Scheme for Certification in the Area of IT Security, Version 2.5,
28 March 2019
[ST] Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) 6.4 with FMC and AnyConnect
Security Target, Version 1.0, 5 August 2022
(This is the end of this report.)