JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
Certification Report
TOMITA Tatsuo, Chairman
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
2-28-8 Honkomagome, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo
IT Product (TOE)
Reception Date of Application
(Reception Number)
2020-12-08 (ITC-0774)
Certification Identification JISEC-C0728
Product Name EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX
Version and Release Numbers 1.00
Product Manufacturer SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION
Conformance of Functionality PP conformant functionality, CC Part 2 Extended
Protection Profile Conformance
U.S. Government Approved Protection Profile - U.S.
Government Protection Profile for Hardcopy Devices
Version 1.0 (IEEE Std. 2600.2TM-2009)
Assurance Package EAL2 Augmented by ALC_FLR.2
Name of IT Security
Evaluation Facility
Information Technology Security Center,
Evaluation Department
This is to report that the evaluation result for the above TOE has been certified as follows.
2021-08-23
YANO Tatsuro, Technical Manager
IT Security Technology Evaluation Department
IT Security Center
Evaluation Criteria, etc.: This TOE is evaluated in accordance with the following
standards prescribed in the "IT Security Evaluation and
Certification Scheme Document."
- Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation
Version 3.1 Release 5
- Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation
Version 3.1 Release 5
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
Evaluation Result: Pass
"EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX Version 1.00" has been evaluated based on
the standards required, in accordance with the provisions of the "Requirements for IT
Security Certification" by Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan, and has
met the specified assurance requirements.
Notice:
This document is the English translation version of the Certification Report published by
the Certification Body of Japan Information Technology Security Evaluation and
Certification Scheme.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary............................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Product Overview............................................................................................................. 1
1.1.1 Protection Profile or Assurance Package...................................................................... 1
1.1.2 TOE and Security Functionality ................................................................................... 1
1.1.2.1 Threats and Security Objectives ................................................................................ 2
1.1.2.2 Configuration and Assumptions................................................................................. 2
1.1.3 Disclaimers ..................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Conduct of Evaluation...................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Certification...................................................................................................................... 3
2. Identification ........................................................................................................................ 4
3. Security Policy...................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Security Function Policies ............................................................................................... 5
3.1.1 Threats and Security Function Policies........................................................................ 5
3.1.1.1 Threats ......................................................................................................................... 5
3.1.1.2 Security Function Policies against Threats............................................................... 6
3.1.2 Organizational Security Policies and Security Function Policies............................... 7
3.1.2.1 Organizational Security Policies................................................................................ 7
3.1.2.2 Security Function Policies to Organizational Security Policies............................... 7
4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope............................................................................. 9
4.1 Usage Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 9
4.2 Environmental Assumptions ........................................................................................... 9
4.3 Clarification of Scope ......................................................................................................11
5. Architectural Information ................................................................................................. 12
5.1 TOE Boundary and Components .................................................................................. 12
5.2 IT Environment.............................................................................................................. 14
6. Documentation................................................................................................................... 15
7. Evaluation conducted by Evaluation Facility and Results............................................. 16
7.1 Evaluation Facility......................................................................................................... 16
7.2 Evaluation Approach...................................................................................................... 16
7.3 Overview of Evaluation Activity.................................................................................... 16
7.4 IT Product Testing.......................................................................................................... 17
7.4.1 Developer Testing ......................................................................................................... 17
7.4.2 Evaluator Independent Testing................................................................................... 19
7.4.3 Evaluator Penetration Testing .................................................................................... 21
7.5 Evaluated Configuration ............................................................................................... 24
7.6 Evaluation Results......................................................................................................... 25
7.7 Evaluator Comments/Recommendations ..................................................................... 25
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
8. Certification........................................................................................................................ 26
8.1 Certification Result ........................................................................................................ 26
8.2 Recommendations .......................................................................................................... 26
9. Annexes............................................................................................................................... 27
10. Security Target................................................................................................................... 27
11. Glossary .............................................................................................................................. 28
12. Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 29
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
1
1. Executive Summary
This Certification Report describes the content of the certification result in relation to IT
Security Evaluation of "EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX Version 1.00"
(hereinafter referred to as the "TOE") developed by SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, and
the evaluation of the TOE was finished on 2021-08 by Information Technology Security
Center, Evaluation Department (hereinafter referred to as the "Evaluation Facility"). It is
intended to report to the sponsor, SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION, and provide security
information to procurement entities and consumers who are interested in the TOE.
Readers of the Certification Report are advised to read the Security Target (hereinafter
referred to as the "ST") described in Chapter 10. Especially, details of security functional
requirements, assurance requirements and rationale for sufficiency of these requirements
of the TOE are described in the ST.
This Certification Report assumes procurement entities who purchase the TOE to be
readers. Note that the Certification Report presents the certification result based on
assurance requirements to which the TOE conforms, and does not guarantee an individual
IT product itself.
1.1 Product Overview
An overview of the TOE functions and operational conditions is described as follows. Refer
to Chapter 2 and subsequent chapters for details.
1.1.1 Protection Profile or Assurance Package
The TOE conforms to the following Protection Profile [14][15] (hereinafter referred to as
the "Conformance PP").
U.S. Government Approved Protection Profile - U.S. Government Protection Profile for
Hardcopy Devices Version 1.0 (IEEE Std. 2600.2™-2009)
Assurance Package of the TOE is EAL2 augmented by ALC_FLR.2.
1.1.2 TOE and Security Functionality
The TOE is a Multi-Function Peripheral (hereinafter referred to as the "MFP") which
provides the functions of print, scan, copy, fax, and document storage and retrieval.
The TOE provides security functions required by the Conformance PP to protect document
data and setting data processed by the TOE.
For these security functionalities, the validity of the design policy and the accuracy of the
implementation were evaluated within the scope of the assurance package.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
2
Threats and assumptions assumed for the TOE are described in the following sections.
1.1.2.1 Threats and Security Objectives
The TOE assumes the following threats and provides the security functions to counter
them.
For protected assets such as the documents that the TOE handles and the setting
information relevant to the security functions, there are threats of disclosure and
tampering caused by unauthorized access to both the TOE and the communication data on
the network.
The TOE provides the security functions to prevent those protected assets from
unauthorized disclosure and tampering.
1.1.2.2 Configuration and Assumptions
It is assumed that the TOE is located in an environment where physical components and
interfaces of the TOE are protected from the unauthorized access. For the operation, the
TOE shall be properly configured, maintained, and managed according to the guidance
documents.
1.1.3 Disclaimers
The following operations are not ensured by this evaluation:
- An environment different from that described in "4.2 Environmental Assumptions"
- TOE with settings different from those described in "7.5 Evaluated Configuration"
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
3
1.2 Conduct of Evaluation
Under the IT Security Evaluation and Certification Scheme that the Certification Body
operates, the Evaluation Facility conducted IT security evaluation and completed on
2021-08, based on functional requirements and assurance requirements of the TOE
according to the publicized documents "IT Security Evaluation and Certification Scheme
Document"[1], "Requirements for IT Security Certification"[2], and "Requirements for
Approval of IT Security Evaluation Facility"[3] provided by the Certification Body.
1.3 Certification
The Certification Body verified the Evaluation Technical Report [13] and the Observation
Reports prepared by the Evaluation Facility as well as evaluation documentation, and
confirmed that the TOE evaluation was conducted in accordance with the prescribed
procedure. The certification oversight reviews were prepared for those concerns found in
the certification process. The Certification Body confirmed that those concerns pointed out
by the Certification Body were fully resolved, and that the TOE evaluation had been
appropriately conducted in accordance with the CC ([4][5][6] or [7][8][9]) and the CEM
(either of [10][11]). The Certification Body prepared this Certification Report based on the
Evaluation Technical Report and fully concluded certification activities.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
4
2. Identification
The TOE is identified as follows:
TOE Name: EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX
TOE Version: 1.00
Developer: SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION
Users can verify that a product is the TOE, which is evaluated and certified, by the
following means.
Users confirm the following information displayed on the printed status sheet and the label
of the FAX board as described in the guidance document.
- MFP main unit: One of the following:
(For Japan) LX-10020M
(For other countries) WF-M21000
- Firmware version: "GR12L4"
- FAX board: Either of the following:
(For Japan) "Super G3/G3 Multi Fax Board / PR3FB0"
(For other countries) "Super G3/G3 Multi Fax Board / PR3FB1"
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
5
3. Security Policy
This chapter describes security function policies that the TOE adopts to counter threats,
and organizational security policies.
The TOE provides the security functions to counter the unauthorized access to protected
assets such as the stored documents in the MFP, and to protect the communication data on
the network.
For each setting that is relevant to the above mentioned security functions, only
administrator is permitted to set configurations in order to prevent the deactivation and
unauthorized use of the security functions.
The following user roles are assumed in the use of the TOE:
- Normal user
A user who is allowed to use basic functions provided by the TOE.
- Administrator
A user who has special authority to configure the settings of the TOE security functions.
The protected assets of the TOE are also defined as follows:
- User Document Data
Document Data of users.
- User Function Data
The information about a user's document or job to be processed by the TOE.
- TSF Confidential Data
The data used for security functions whose integrity and confidentiality are required. In
the TOE, they correspond to user passwords, passwords for accessing external servers,
and audit logs, etc.
- TSF Protected Data
The data used for security functions whose integrity only are required. In the TOE, they
correspond to the user ID of the user, user authority information, time setting
information, and network setting information, etc.
3.1 Security Function Policies
The TOE possesses the security functions to counter the threats shown in Section 3.1.1,
and to satisfy the organizational security policies shown in Section 3.1.2.
3.1.1 Threats and Security Function Policies
3.1.1.1 Threats
The TOE assumes the threats shown in Table 3-1 and provides the security functions to
counter them. These threats are the same as the ones written in the conforming PP.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
6
Table 3-1 Assumed Threats
Identifier Threat
T.DOC.DIS User Document Data may be disclosed to unauthorized persons
T.DOC.ALT User Document Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
T.FUNC.ALT User Function Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
T.PROT.ALT TSF Protected Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
T.CONF.DIS TSF Confidential Data may be disclosed to unauthorized persons
T.CONF.ALT TSF Confidential Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
3.1.1.2 Security Function Policies against Threats
The TOE counters the threats shown in Table 3-1 by the following security function policies.
The details of each security function are described in Chapter 5.
1) Countermeasures against the threats "T.DOC.DIS," "T.DOC.ALT" and "T.FUNC.ALT"
These are threats to user data (User Document Data and User Function Data), and the
TOE counters these threats using the "User Identification and Authentication Function,"
the "Access Control Function for TOE Function," the "Document Access Control
Function," the "Residual Data Overwrite Function," and the "Network Protection
Function."
The "User Identification and Authentication Function" permits only the users who
succeeded at the identification and authentication to use the TOE.
The " Access Control Function for TOE Function" and the "Document Access Control
Function" are used when an identified and authenticated user uses basic MFP functions
such as the print function, scan function, copy function, or FAX function, etc. With these
functions, the authority assigned to the user is checked, only the authorized user is
permitted to use the function, and access control to the document data on which the
function is to be carried out is also performed, and only users with access authority are
permitted to access the document data.
The "Residual Data Overwrite Function" overwrites and erases deleted documents and
temporarily stored documents from the storage device such as the HDD to prevent
unauthorized access to residual information.
The "Network Protection Function" provides an encrypted communication function when
communicating between the TOE and various servers and client PCs, and protects
communication data.
With the above functions, the TOE prevents the user data to be protected from
unauthorized disclosure and alteration by unauthorized use of the TOE and
unauthorized access to the communication data.
2) Countermeasures against the threats "T.PROT.ALT," "T.CONF.DIS," and "T.CONF.ALT"
These are threats to the data used in the security functions (TSF Confidential Data and
TSF Protected Data), and the TOE counters these threats with the "User Identification
and Authentication Function," the "Security Management Function," and the "Network
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
7
Protection Function."
The "User Identification and Authentication Function" and the "Security Management
Function" perform access control on these data according to the role of the user in order
to prevent unauthorized access beyond the user's authority to data used in the security
functions.
The "Network Protection Function" provides an encrypted communication function
when communicating between the TOE and various servers and client PCs, and
protects communication data.
With the above functions, the TOE prevents the user data to be protected from
unauthorized disclosure and alteration by unauthorized use of the TOE and
unauthorized access to the communication data.
3.1.2 Organizational Security Policies and Security Function Policies
3.1.2.1 Organizational Security Policies
Organizational security policies required for the TOE are shown in Table 3-2. These
organizational security policies are the same as the ones written in the conforming PP.
Table 3-2 Organizational Security Policies
Identifier Organizational Security Policy
P.USER.AUTHORIZATION To preserve operational accountability and security,
users will be authorized to use the TOE only as
permitted by the TOE Owner.
P.SOFTWARE.VERIFICATION To detect corruption of the executable code in the TSF,
procedures will exist to self-verify executable code in the
TSF.
P.AUDIT.LOGGING To preserve operational accountability and security,
records that provide an audit trail of TOE use and
security-relevant events will be created, maintained,
and protected from unauthorized disclosure or
alteration, and will be reviewed by authorized
personnel.
P.INTERFACE.MANAGEMENT To prevent unauthorized use of the external interfaces
of the TOE, operation of those interfaces will be
controlled by the TOE and its IT environment.
3.1.2.2 Security Function Policies to Organizational Security Policies
The TOE provides the following security functions to satisfy the organizational security
policies shown in Table 3-2. The details of each security function are described in Chapter
5.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
8
1) Means to support organizational security policy "P.USER.AUTHORIZATION"
The TOE implements this policy by the "User Identification and Authentication
Function" and the "Access Control Function for TOE Function."
The "User Identification and Authentication Function" permits only the users who
succeeded in the identification and authentication to use the TOE.
The "Access Control Function for TOE Function" is used when an identified and
authenticated user uses basic MFP functions such as the print function, scan function,
copy function, or FAX function, etc. The authority assigned to the user is checked, and
only the authorized user is permitted to use the function.
2) Means to support organizational security policy "P.SOFTWARE.VERIFICATION"
The TOE implements this policy by the "Self-Test Function."
The "Self-Test Function" verifies the integrity of the execution code of the security
function at startup of the MFP.
3) Means to support organizational security policy "P.AUDIT.LOGGING"
The TOE implements this policy by "Audit Log Function."
The "Audit Log Function" records the events relevant to security functions as the audit
log. The audit log stored in the TOE can be read out only by the identified and
authenticated administrator.
4) Means to support organizational security policy "P.INTERFACE.MANAGEMENT"
The TOE implements this policy by the "User Identification and Authentication
Function" and the "Network Protection Function."
The "User Identification and Authentication Function" permits only the users who
succeeded at the identification and authentication to use the TOE. It also terminates the
session after a certain time of no operation by user.
The "Network Protection Function" provides a function of limiting data transfer between
a wired LAN and a telephone line, and prevents unauthorized data transfer.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
9
4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope
This chapter describes the assumptions and the operational environment to operate the
TOE as useful information for the assumed readers to determine the use of the TOE.
4.1 Usage Assumptions
Table 4-1 shows assumptions to operate the TOE. These assumptions are the same as the
ones written in the conforming PP. The effective performances of the TOE security
functions are not assured unless these assumptions are satisfied.
Table 4-1 Assumptions in Use of the TOE
Identifier Assumption
A.ACCESS.MANAGED The TOE is located in a restricted or monitored
environment that provides protection from unmanaged
access to the physical components and data interfaces of
the TOE.
A.USER.TRAINING TOE Users are aware of the security policies and
procedures of their organization and are trained and
competent to follow those policies and procedures.
A.ADMIN.TRAINING Administrators are aware of the security policies and
procedures of their organization, are trained and
competent to follow the manufacturer's guidance and
documentation, and correctly configure and operate the
TOE in accordance with those policies and procedures.
A.ADMIN.TRUST Administrators do not use their privileged access rights
for malicious purposes.
4.2 Environmental Assumptions
The TOE is installed in a general office and connected to a LAN, and it is used from client
PCs connected to the LAN. Figure 4-1 shows the general operational environment of the
TOE.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
10
Figure 4-1 Operational Environment of the TOE
As shown in Figure 4-1, the TOE is assumed to be used in an environment such as offices,
etc. where office documents are handled. The TOE is connected to the LAN and telephone
line.
Various server computers such as an LDAP server, SMB server, and FTP server, etc. are
connected to the LAN, and communicate with the TOE for documents and for collection of
various information, etc. Also, a firewall is installed to protect the LAN and the TOE from
threats from external networks such as the internet. The server software used in this
evaluation is shown in Table 4-2.
The operation of the TOE may use the TOE's own operation panel or a client PC connected
to the LAN. The software shown in Table 4-3 is installed on the client PC.
It should be noted that the reliability of the hardware and the software other than the TOE
shown in this configuration is outside the scope of this evaluation. It is assumed to be
trustworthy.
Table 4-2 Server Software Used in This Evaluation
Software Name and version
DNS server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
FTP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
LDAP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
NTP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
SMB server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
SMTP server hMailServer 5.6.7-B2425
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
11
Table 4-3 Software of Client PC
Software Name and version
Printer driver
For Microsoft Windows
Japanese version: Epson Printing System(J) Version 3.01.00
English version: Epson Printing System(A) Version 3.01.00
Browser Microsoft Edge
4.3 Clarification of Scope
The evaluated security functions of the TOE have the following constraints:
1) IPsec for IPv6
In this evaluation, only IPv4 is evaluated for the IPsec protocol. IPsec for IPv6 has not
been evaluated and is not subject to assurance.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
12
5. Architectural Information
This chapter explains the scope and the main components of the TOE.
5.1 TOE Boundary and Components
Figure 5-1 shows the composition of the TOE.
Figure 5.1 Composition of the TOE
The TOE functions consist of security functions and other basic MFP functions. The
security functions of the TOE are described below. For the basic MFP functions, see the
glossary.
1) User Identification and Authentication Function
This function identifies and authenticates a user by confirming that the entered user ID
and password match the user ID and password managed inside the TOE. This function is
applied at the time of the following operations:
- Logon from the operation panel
- Administrator logon from a client PC (browser)
- Sending a print job from a client PC (printer driver)
Also, in order to secure necessary authentication strength, the following functions are
provided:
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
13
- If authentication fails, put the account in the locked state for a certain period of time.
- When setting a password, it is required to be of at least a certain quality in terms of
length (number of digits) and character types.
- If there is no operation for a certain period of time after logon, the session is
terminated.
When the validity of the password is confirmed, the use authority of the TOE prescribed
in advance for each role of the user is assigned, and use of the TOE is permitted. The
roles specified by the TOE are normal users and administrator.
2) Access Control Function for TOE Function
This function restricts the use of basic MFP functions such as print, scan, copy, and FAX.
When the user uses a basic MFP function, whether or not to operate the function is
determined with reference to the usage authority for basic functions set for each user.
3) Document Access Control Function
In response to a processing request from a user, this function implements access control
for the document data and job based on the user ID of the user and the authority for each
role. The user ID of the user who performed the operation is associated with the print job
input via the network and the document data saved in the TOE, and when the processing
request is received from the user, the function controls permission or rejection based on
the user's user ID and their operation authority. When the user is an administrator,
deletion of all document data and jobs is permitted.
4) Residual Data Overwrite Function
This function overwrites deleted documents and temporarily saved documents with a
specific value (0x00) in order to completely erase them from devices such as HDDs which
are used as storage areas, making it impossible to access the residual data.
5) Network Protection Function
This function provides the following two functions for the purpose of protecting
communication data, etc. when the TOE communicates with the outside.
- When the TOE communicates with various servers and client PCs via the LAN, IPsec
which is a cryptographic communication protocol is applied to prevent communication
data from being leaked or tampered.
- Provides a function of limiting data transfer between a wired LAN and a telephone
line, and prevents unauthorized data transfer.
6) Security Management Function
This function prevents unauthorized access beyond authority by performing access
control according to the role of the user for data used in security functions such as user
information and various setting information.
7) Self-Test Function
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
14
This function verifies the hash value of the firmware at startup of the TOE main body
and verifies the integrity of the execution code of the security functions.
8) Audit Log Function
This function is the function to record the audit events relevant to security functions as
the audit log. Only the identified and authenticated administrator can download the
audit log stored in the TOE to client PCs. The audit log cannot be modified.
5.2 IT Environment
The TOE is connected to the LAN and communicates with server computers, such as an
FTP server, an SMB server, and an LDAP server, as well as with client PCs. The TOE
communicates with fax devices via telephone line.
Client PCs connected via the LAN use the TOE via a printer driver or a browser.
The server computer and the client PCs necessary for the operation of the TOE must be
prepared at the responsibility of the user.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
15
6. Documentation
The identification of the documents attached to the TOE is listed below. TOE users are
required to fully understand and comply with the following documents in order to satisfy
the assumptions.
(Japanese)
Name1 Version
User's Guide NPD6659-02 JA
Supplemental Security Guide NPD6692-01 JA
Before Use 4140894-00
(English)
Name Version
User's Guide NPD6658-02 EN
Supplemental Security Guide NPD6692-01 EN
Before Use 4140894-00
1 The guidance name listed in Table 6-1 is the translation of Japanese name.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
16
7. Evaluation conducted by Evaluation Facility and Results
7.1 Evaluation Facility
Information Technology Security Center, Evaluation Department that conducted the
evaluation as the Evaluation Facility is approved under JISEC and is accredited by NITE
(National Institute of Technology and Evaluation), the Accreditation Body, which joins
Mutual Recognition Arrangement of ILAC (International Laboratory Accreditation
Cooperation). It is periodically confirmed that the above Evaluation Facility meets the
requirements on the appropriateness of the management and evaluators for maintaining
the quality of evaluation.
7.2 Evaluation Approach
Evaluation was conducted by using the evaluation methods prescribed in the CEM in
accordance with the assurance components in the CC Part 3. Details for evaluation
activities were reported in the Evaluation Technical Report. The Evaluation Technical
Report explains the summary of the TOE as well as the content of the evaluation and the
verdict of each work unit in the CEM.
7.3 Overview of Evaluation Activity
The history of the evaluation conducted is described in the Evaluation Technical Report as
follows.
The evaluation started on 2020-12 and concluded upon completion of the Evaluation
Technical Report dated 2021-08. The Evaluation Facility received a full set of evaluation
deliverables necessary for evaluation provided by the developer, and examined the evidence
in relation to a series of evaluation conducted.
Additionally, the evaluator directly visited the development site on 2021-06, and examined
procedural status conducted in relation to each work unit for configuration management
and delivery, by investigating records and interviewing staff. Furthermore, the evaluator
conducted the sampling check of the developer testing and the evaluator testing by using
the developer testing environment at the developer site on 2021-06.
Concerns found in evaluation activities for each work unit were all issued as the
Observation Reports, and those were reported to the developer. Those concerns were
reviewed by the developer, and all the concerns were solved eventually.
Concerns that the Certification Body found in the evaluation process were described as the
certification oversight reviews, and those were sent to the Evaluation Facility. After the
Evaluation Facility and the developer examined them, those concerns were reflected in the
Evaluation Technical Report.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
17
7.4 IT Product Testing
The evaluator confirmed the validity of the testing that the developer had performed. As
the verification results of the evidence shown in the process of the evaluation and the
testing performed by the developer, the evaluator performed the reproducibility testing,
additional testing and penetration testing based on vulnerability assessments judged to be
necessary.
7.4.1 Developer Testing
The evaluator evaluated the integrity of the developer testing that the developer had
performed and the documentation of actual testing results. The content of the developer
testing evaluated by the evaluator is explained as follows.
1) Developer Testing Environment
Figure 7-1 shows the testing configuration performed by the developer, and Table 7-1 shows
the main configuration items.
Figure 7-1 Configuration of the Developer Testing
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
18
Table 7-1 Configuration Items
Configuration Item Description
TOE LX-10020M with FAX 1.00
WF-M21000 with FAX 1.00
NTP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
LDAP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
(Manage the address book and use it when
addressing FAX data)
SMTP server hMailServer 5.6.7 - Build 2425
SMB server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
FTP server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 Standard
DNS server Microsoft Windows Server 2016 R2 Standard
MFP
(for FAX sending/receiving)
WF-7840
Pseudo-wire exchange EXCEL-N008 (Nishiyama)
PC1, PC2 OS: Windows 10
Browser: Microsoft Edge
Printer driver:
Japanese version:
Epson Printing system(J) Version 3.01.00
English version:
Epson Printing system(A) Version 3.01.00
The developer testing was performed in the same TOE testing environment as the TOE
configuration identified in the ST.
2) Summary of the Developer Testing
A summary of the developer testing is as follows.
a. Developer Testing Outline
An outline of the developer testing is as follows.
<Developer Testing Approach>
In addition to the method of stimulating the external interface (operation panel, LAN
interface, etc.) assumed in the usual TOE usage and visually observing the result, the
developer testing also includes using the generated audit log and the development
interface to confirm the internal status and confirming the communication protocol
between the client PC and various servers and the TOE by packet capture.
<Content of the Performed Developer Testing>
The expected values of testing results described in testing specifications which are
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
19
provided in advance by the developer were compared to the values of the actual
developer testing results described in the testing result reports which are also provided
by the developer. As a result, it was found that the values of the actual testing results
are in conformity to those of the expected testing results.
b. Scope of the Performed Developer Testing
The developer testing was performed on 41 items by the developer. By the coverage
analysis, it was verified that all security functions and external interfaces described in
the functional specification had been tested.
c. Result
The evaluator confirmed an approach of the performed developer testing and the
legitimacy of tested items, and confirmed consistencies between the testing approach
described in the testing plan and the actual testing approach. The evaluator confirmed
consistencies between the testing results expected by the developer and the actual
testing results performed by the developer.
7.4.2 Evaluator Independent Testing
The evaluator performed the sample testing to reconfirm the implementation of security
functions of the product using the test items extracted from the developer testing. In
addition, the evaluator performed the evaluator independent testing (hereinafter referred
to as the "independent testing") to gain further confidence that security functions are
certainly implemented, based on the evidence shown in the process of the evaluation.
The independent testing performed by the evaluator is explained below.
1) Independent Testing Environment
The configuration of the independent testing conducted by the evaluator is the same as the
configuration of the developer testing shown in Figure 7-1.
The components of the independent testing environment and the test tools includes those
used for the developer testing and those developed independently by the developers, and
the evaluator conducted their validity confirmation and operation testing.
2) Summary of the Independent Testing
A summary of the independent testing is as follows.
a. Viewpoints of the Independent Testing
Viewpoints of the independent testing that the evaluator designed from the developer
testing and the provided evaluation documentation are shown below.
<Viewpoints of the Independent Testing>
(1) For operations that seem to be deficient in developer testing in terms of coverage
because there are many kinds of input parameters, add variations such as
combinations of parameters.
(2) For execution timing of several TSFs and combination of execution, the testing items
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
20
to which conditions are added are performed.
(3) The testing items are selected in the sampling testing from the following viewpoints:
- The testing items are selected to include all of TSFs and TSFIs in terms of
completeness.
- The testing items are selected to cover the different testing approaches and testing
environments.
- The testing items involving TSFI that meet many of the SFRs are mainly selected in
order to conduct tests efficiently.
b. Independent Testing Outline
An outline of the independent testing that the evaluator performed is as follows.
<Independent Testing Approach>
The independent testing was performed with the same testing approach as the
developer testing.
<Content of the Performed Independent Testing>
Based on the viewpoints of the independent testing, 6 items for the independent
testing and 36 items for the sampling testing were performed.
The main contents of the independent testing corresponding to the viewpoints are
shown in Table 7-2.
Table 7-2 Content of the Performed Independent Testing
Viewpoint Outline of the Independent Testing
(1) - Confirm that the quality check at the time of setting a
password is carried out according to the specification
by increasing the variations of the input password.
- Change the setting parameters of the communication
protocol with the outside and confirm that it behaves
as specified.
(2) - Confirm that the behavior when an account is deleted,
or authorization is changed while logged on is as
specified.
- Confirm that access control is performed according to
the specification for operation from multiple interfaces.
c. Result
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
21
All the independent testing performed by the evaluator was correctly completed, and the
evaluator confirmed the behavior of the TOE. The evaluator confirmed consistencies
between the expected behavior and all the testing results.
7.4.3 Evaluator Penetration Testing
The evaluator devised and performed the necessary evaluator penetration testing
(hereinafter referred to as the "penetration testing") on the potentially exploitable
vulnerabilities of concern under the assumed environment of use and attack level from the
evidence shown in the process of the evaluation. The penetration testing performed by the
evaluator is explained below.
1) Summary of the Penetration Testing
A summary of the penetration testing performed by the evaluator is as follows.
a. Vulnerability of Concern
The evaluator searched into the provided documentation and the publicly available
information for the potential vulnerabilities, and then identified the following
vulnerabilities which require the penetration testing.
(1) Unauthorized access to the TOE may be caused by unintentional network port
interfaces.
(2) Security functions may be bypassed in case of entering data, for interfaces, which
have the values and formats that are unintended by the TOE.
(3) Security functions may be bypassed by operating the TOE overloaded.
(4) By turning off the power at an unexpected timing, the correct operation of the
security function may be infringed.
b. Penetration Testing Outline
The evaluator performed the following penetration testing to identify potentially
exploitable vulnerabilities.
<Penetration Testing Environment>
The penetration testing environment is identical with those of the developer testing
shown in Figure 7-1, and evaluator independent testing.
Table 7-3 shows key tools used in the penetration testing.
Table 7-3 Penetration Testing Tools
Components Overview
Nessus
Version 8.14.1
Vulnerability Scanning Tool
(The vulnerability database is the latest as of June 11, 2021)
Nikto
Version 2.1.6
Vulnerability Scanning Tool for Web
(The vulnerability database is the latest as of June 11, 2021)
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
22
Tamper IE
Version 1.2
Inspection tool of Web vulnerabilities with Proxy traffic
Burp Suite
Community
Edition v2020.6
Inspection tool of Web vulnerabilities with Proxy traffic
OWASP ZAP
Version 2.10.0
Inspection tool of Web vulnerabilities with Proxy traffic
(The vulnerability database is the latest as of June 11, 2021)
Nmap
Version 7.80
Port Scanning Tool
PRET
Version 0.40
PJL, Postscript Testing Tool
<Content of the Performed Penetration Testing>
Table 7-4 shows contents of the penetration testing corresponding to the
vulnerabilities of concern.
Table 7-4 Content of the Performed Penetration Testing
Vulnerability Penetration Testing Outline
(1) - Confirmed that the unintended network ports were not
opened using the port scanning tool and the vulnerability
scanning tool.
- Confirmed that there are no vulnerabilities to
unauthorized inputs for available ports.
(2) - Confirmed that there are no known vulnerabilities in the
Web interface that accesses the TOE using the vulnerability
inspection tool.
- Confirmed that the security functions are not bypassed by
the specified URL at the time of connecting to the TOE via a
Web browser.
- Confirmed that there is no implementation vulnerability
related to PJL or PostScript using the testing tool.
- Confirmed that the TOE cannot receive color FAX data.
(3) - Confirmed that the TOE is not in a non-secure state in the
resource exhaustion state.
(4) - Performed a power supply operation in a situation different
from that during normal operation such as during TOE
startup processing, and confirmed that the TOE is not in a
non-secure state.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
23
c. Result
In the penetration testing performed by the evaluator, the evaluator did not find any
exploitable vulnerability that attackers who have the assumed attack potential could
exploit.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
24
7.5 Evaluated Configuration
The configuration conditions of the TOE, which are the assumptions of this evaluation,
are described in the guidance documents shown in Chapter 6. TOE administrator needs
to activate the security functions of the TOE and to configure the TOE as described in the
appropriate guidance documents for secure use. If these setting values are changed to
different values from those described in the guidance documents, such cases are not
included in the assurance of this evaluation.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
25
7.6 Evaluation Results
The evaluator had concluded that the TOE satisfies all work units prescribed in the CEM
by submitting the Evaluation Technical Report.
In the evaluation, the following were confirmed.
- PP Conformance:
U.S. Government Approved Protection Profile - U.S. Government Protection Profile for
Hardcopy Devices Version 1.0 (IEEE Std. 2600.2TM-2009)
The TOE also conforms to the following SFR packages defined in the above PP:
- 2600.2-PRT, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Print Functions, Operational
Environment B
- 2600.2-SCN, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Scan Functions, Operational
Environment B
- 2600.2-CPY, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Copy Functions, Operational
Environment B
- 2600.2-FAX, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Fax Functions, Operational
Environment B
- 2600.2-DSR, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Document Storage and Retrieval
Functions, Operational Environment B
- 2600.2-SMI, SFR Package for Hardcopy Device Shared-medium Interface Functions,
Operational Environment B
- Security functional requirements: Common Criteria Part 2 Extended
- Security assurance requirements: Common Criteria Part 3 Conformant
As a result of the evaluation, the verdict "PASS" was confirmed for the following assurance
components.
- All assurance components of EAL2 package
- Additional assurance component ALC_FLR.2
The result of the evaluation is only applied to those which are composed by the TOE
corresponding to the identification described in Chapter 2.
7.7 Evaluator Comments/Recommendations
There is no evaluator recommendation to be addressed to procurement entities.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
26
8. Certification
The Certification Body performed the certification from the following viewpoints based on
the materials submitted by the Evaluation Facility during the evaluation process.
1. Contents pointed out in the Observation Reports shall be adequate.
2. Contents pointed out in the Observation Reports shall properly be solved.
3. The submitted documentation was sampled, the content was examined, and the related
work units shall be evaluated as presented in the Evaluation Technical Report.
4. Rationale of the evaluation verdict by the evaluator presented in the Evaluation
Technical Report shall be adequate.
5. The evaluator's evaluation methodology presented in the Evaluation Technical Report
shall conform to the CEM.
Concerns found in the certification process were prepared as the certification oversight
reviews, and those were sent to the Evaluation Facility. The Certification Body confirmed
such concerns pointed out in the certification oversight reviews were solved in the ST and
the Evaluation Technical Report and issued this Certification Report.
8.1 Certification Result
As a result of verification of the submitted Evaluation Technical Report, Observation
Reports and related evaluation documentation, the Certification Body determined that the
TOE satisfies all assurance requirements for EAL2 augmented by ALC_FLR.2 in the CC
Part 3.
8.2 Recommendations
Users of the TOE should refer to "4.2 Environmental Assumptions" and "7.5 Evaluated
Configuration" and exercise caution regarding whether the scope of evaluation of the TOE
and operational requirements can be handled in the actual TOE operational environment.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
27
9. Annexes
There is no annex.
10. Security Target
The Security Target [12] of the TOE is provided as a separate document from this
Certification Report.
EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX Security Target, Rev.05, July 30, 2021, SEIKO
EPSON CORPORATION
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
28
11. Glossary
The abbreviations relating to the CC used in this report are listed below.
CC Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation
CEM Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation
EAL Evaluation Assurance Level
PP Protection Profile
ST Security Target
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSF TOE Security Functionality
The abbreviations relating to the TOE used in this report are listed below.
HDD Hard Disk Drive
MFP Multi-Function Peripheral
The definitions of terms used in this report are listed below.
Basic MFP functions The basic functions as an MFP, consisting of the following
functions:
Print function (print document data received from a client
PC), scan function, copy function, FAX function, document
storage and retrieval function (function to save and retrieve
digital documents sent and received by the FAX function)
FTP server A server for sending and receiving files using FTP (File
Transfer Protocol).
Used for transfer of scan data that the TOE created using
the scan function and received FAX data.
LDAP server A server that provides directory services using LDAP (Light
Directory Access Protocol).
The TOE refers to the address book managed by the LDAP
server and uses it for the destination of fax transmission.
SMB server A server for file sharing, printer sharing, etc. using SMB
(Server Message Block).
Used for transfer of scan data that the TOE created using
the scan function and received FAX data.
SMTP server A server for transmitting emails using SMTP (Simple Mail
Transfer Protocol).
Used when the TOE sends an email of scanned data created
using the scan function.
Web Config An MFP built-in function that performs various settings
(print setting, network setting, user restriction setting,
administrator password setting, etc.) by accessing via the
browser.
JISEC-CC-CRP-C0728-01-2021
29
12. Bibliography
[1] IT Security Evaluation and Certification Scheme Document, October 2020,
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan, CCS-01
[2] Requirements for IT Security Certification, October 2020,
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan, CCM-02
[3] Requirements for Approval of IT Security Evaluation Facility, October 2020,
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan, CCM-03
[4] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 1:
Introduction and general model, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017,
CCMB-2017-04-001
[5] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017,
CCMB-2017-04-002
[6] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017,
CCMB-2017-04-003
[7] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 1:
Introduction and general model, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017,
CCMB-2017-04-001, (Japanese Version 1.0, July 2017)
[8] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017, CCMB-2017-04-002,
(Japanese Version 1.0, July 2017)
[9] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017, CCMB-2017-04-003,
(Japanese Version 1.0, July 2017)
[10] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation: Evaluation
methodology, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017, CCMB-2017-04-004
[11] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation: Evaluation
methodology, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017, CCMB-2017-04-004,
(Japanese Version 1.0, July 2017)
[12] EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX Security Target, Rev.05, July 30, 2021,
SEIKO EPSON CORPORATION
[13] EPSON LX-10020M/WF-M21000 with FAX Evaluation Technical Report, Version 1.2,
August 5, 2021, Information Technology Security Center, Evaluation Department
[14] U.S. Government Approved Protection Profile - U.S. Government Protection Profile
for Hardcopy Devices Version 1.0 (IEEE Std. 2600.2TM-2009)
[15] CCEVS Policy Letter #20, 15 November 2010, National Information Assurance
Partnership