National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
416 Maetan-3dong, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si,
Gyeonggi-do, 443-742 Korea
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on
Android 7 (IVPNCPP14)
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-10813-2017
Dated: June 21, 2017
Version: 0.3
National Institute of Standards and Technology National Security Agency
Information Technology Laboratory Information Assurance Directorate
100 Bureau Drive 9800 Savage Road STE 6940
Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6940
®
TM
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Validation Team
Stelios Melachrinoudis
The MITRE Corporation
Jerome Myers
The Aerospace Corporation
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
James Arnold
Tammy Compton
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
Catonsville, MD
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
iii
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 1
2 Identification............................................................................................................... 1
3 Architectural Information ........................................................................................... 3
3.1 TOE Evaluated Configuration ............................................................................ 3
3.2 Physical Boundaries............................................................................................ 6
4 Security Policy............................................................................................................ 6
4.1 Cryptographic support ........................................................................................ 6
4.2 User data protection ............................................................................................ 7
4.3 Identification and authentication......................................................................... 7
4.4 Security management.......................................................................................... 7
4.5 Protection of the TSF.......................................................................................... 7
4.6 Trusted path/channels ......................................................................................... 7
5 Assumptions................................................................................................................ 7
6 Clarification of Scope ................................................................................................. 7
7 Documentation............................................................................................................ 8
8 IT Product Testing ...................................................................................................... 8
8.1 Developer Testing............................................................................................... 9
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing ............................................................... 9
9 Evaluated Configuration ............................................................................................. 9
10 Results of the Evaluation ............................................................................................ 9
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE).......................................................... 10
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)............................................................ 10
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD) ............................................... 10
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC) ................................... 11
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE) ............... 11
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)....................................................... 11
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results........................................................................ 11
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations .................................................................. 12
12 Annexes..................................................................................................................... 12
13 Security Target.......................................................................................................... 12
14 Glossary .................................................................................................................... 12
15 Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 13
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
1
1 Executive Summary
This report documents the assessment of the National Information Assurance Partnership
(NIAP) validation team of the evaluation of Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7
(IVPNCPP14) solution provided by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. It presents the evaluation
results, their justifications, and the conformance results. This Validation Report is not an
endorsement of the Target of Evaluation by any agency of the U.S. government, and no
warranty is either expressed or implied.
The evaluation was performed by the Gossamer Security Solutions (Gossamer) Common
Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL) in Catonsville, MD, United States of America, and was
completed in May 2017. The information in this report is largely derived from the Evaluation
Technical Report (ETR) and associated test reports, all written by Gossamer Security
Solutions. The evaluation determined that the product is both Common Criteria Part 2
Extended and Part 3 Conformant, and meets the assurance requirements of the Protection
Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4, 21 October 2013.
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7.
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) identified in this Validation Report has been evaluated at a
NIAP approved Common Criteria Testing Laboratory using the Common Methodology for
IT Security Evaluation (Version 3.1, Rev 4) for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT
Security Evaluation (Version 3.1, Rev 4). This Validation Report applies only to the specific
version of the TOE as evaluated. The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the
provisions of the NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme and the
conclusions of the testing laboratory in the evaluation technical report are consistent with the
evidence provided.
The validation team monitored the activities of the evaluation team, provided guidance on
technical issues and evaluation processes, and reviewed the individual work units and
successive versions of the ETR. The validation team found that the evaluation showed that
the product satisfies all of the functional requirements and assurance requirements stated in
the Security Target (ST). Therefore the validation team concludes that the testing
laboratory’s findings are accurate, the conclusions justified, and the conformance results are
correct. The conclusions of the testing laboratory in the evaluation technical report are
consistent with the evidence produced.
The technical information included in this report was obtained from the Samsung Electronics
Co., Ltd. Samsung Galaxy Devices VPN Client on Android 7 (IVPNCPP14) Security Target,
version 1.1, March 29, 2017 and analysis performed by the Validation Team.
2 Identification
The CCEVS is a joint National Security Agency (NSA) and National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) effort to establish commercial facilities to perform trusted product
evaluations. Under this program, security evaluations are conducted by commercial testing
laboratories called Common Criteria Testing Laboratories (CCTLs) using the Common
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
2
Evaluation Methodology (CEM) in accordance with National Voluntary Laboratory
Assessment Program (NVLAP) accreditation.
The NIAP Validation Body assigns Validators to monitor the CCTLs to ensure quality and
consistency across evaluations. Developers of information technology products desiring a
security evaluation contract with a CCTL and pay a fee for their product’s evaluation. Upon
successful completion of the evaluation, the product is added to NIAP’s Validated Products
List.
Table 1 provides information needed to completely identify the product, including:
 The Target of Evaluation (TOE): the fully qualified identifier of the product as evaluated.
 The Security Target (ST), describing the security features, claims, and assurances of the
product.
 The conformance result of the evaluation.
 The Protection Profile to which the product is conformant.
 The organizations and individuals participating in the evaluation.
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers
Item Identifier
Evaluation Scheme United States NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
TOE Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 (IVPNCPP14)
Protection Profile
(Specific models identified in Section 3.1)
Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4,
21 October 2013
ST Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 (IVPNCPP14) Security Target,
version 1.1, March 29, 2017
Evaluation Technical
Report
Evaluation Technical Report for Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7
(IVPNCPP14) , version 0.2, May 3, 2017
CC Version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,
rev 4
Conformance Result CC Part 2 extended, CC Part 3 conformant
Sponsor Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Developer Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Common Criteria
Testing Lab (CCTL)
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
CCEVS Validators Stelios Melachrinoudis
The MITRE Corporation
Jerome Myers
Aerospace Corporation
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
3
3 Architectural Information
Note: The following architectural description is based on the description presented in the
Security Target.
The TOE is a VPN client that runs on a mobile operating system (the TOE platform) based
on Android 7.0 with modifications made to increase the level of security provided to end
users and enterprises. The TOE is intended to be used as part of an enterprise messaging
solution providing mobile staff with enterprise connectivity.
The TOE platform includes a Common Criteria mode (or “CC mode”) that an administrator
can invoke through the use of an MDM or through a dedicated administrative application
(see the Guidance for instructions to obtain the application). The TOE platform must meet
the following prerequisites in order for an administrator to transition the TOE platform to
CC mode.
 Require a screen lock password (swipe, PIN, pattern, or facial recognition screen
locks are not allowed).
 The maximum password failure retry policy should be less than or equal to ten.
 Device encryption must be enabled or a screen lock password required to decrypt
data on boot.
 Revocation checking must be enabled.
 External storage must be encrypted.
 Password recovery policy must not be enabled.
 Password history length must not be set.
When CC mode has been enabled, the TOE platform behaves as follows.
 The TOE platform sets the system wide Android CC mode property to “Enabled” if
all the prerequisites have been met.
 The TOE platform performs power-on self-tests.
 The TOE platform performs secure boot integrity checking of the kernel and key
system executables.
 The TOE platform prevents loading of custom firmware/kernels and requires all
updates occur through FOTA (Samsung’s Firmware Over The Air firmware update
method)
 The TOE platform uses CAVP approved cryptographic ciphers when joining and
communicating with wireless networks.
 The TOE platform utilizes CAVP approved cryptographic ciphers for TLS.
 The TOE platform ensures FOTA updates utilize 2048-bit PKCS #1 RSA-PSS
formatted signatures (with SHA-512 hashing).
3.1 TOE Evaluated Configuration
There are different models of the mobile phone into which Samsung embeds the TOE (the
Error! Reference source not found.). These models differ physically and differ in their
internal components (as described in the table below).
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
4
The model numbers of the mobile device used during the evaluation is as follows:
Device Name
Model
Number
Chipset
Vendor
CPU
Build
Arch/ISA
Android
Version
Kernel
Version
Build
Number
Galaxy S8 SM-G955F System LSI Exynos 8895 A64 7.0 4.4.13 NRD90M
Galaxy S8+ SM-G955U Qualcomm MSM8998 A64 7.0 4.4.16 NRD90M
Galaxy S7 Edge SM-G935F System LSI Exynos 8890 A64 7.0 3.18.14 NRD90M
Galaxy S7 Edge SM-G935A Qualcomm MSM8996 A64 7.0 3.18.31 NRD90M
Galaxy Tab S3 SM-T825Y Qualcomm MSM8996 A64 7.0 3.18.31 NRD90M
Galaxy S6 Edge SM-G925V System LSI Exynos 7420 A64 7.0 3.10.61 NRD90M
The devices include a final letter or number at the end of the name that denotes that the device
is for a specific carrier (for example, V = Verizon Wireless and A = AT&T, which were used
during the evaluation). The following list of letters/numbers denotes the specific models
which may be validated:
V – Verizon Wireless,
P - Sprint,
R4 – US Cellular,
S – SK Telecom,
L – LG Uplus,
K - KT, Korea Telecom
A – AT&T,
T – T-Mobile,
C/F/I - International
For each device there are specific models which are validated. This table lists the specific
carrier models which have the validated configuration and are included by equivalence.
Evaluated
Device
Chipset
Vendor
CPU Equivalent Devices Differences
Galaxy S8+ Qualcomm MSM8998 Galaxy S8
(Qualcomm)
S8+ is larger
Galaxy S8 Qualcomm MSM8998 Galaxy S8 Active
(Qualcomm)
Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
S7 Active has a IP68 &
MIL-STD-810G certified
body
Galaxy S8+ System LSI Exynos 8895 Galaxy S8 (System
LSI)
S8+ is larger
Galaxy S7
Edge
Qualcomm MSM8996 Galaxy S7
(Qualcomm)
Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
Galaxy S7
Edge
Qualcomm MSM8996 Galaxy S7 Active
(Qualcomm)
Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
5
Evaluated
Device
Chipset
Vendor
CPU Equivalent Devices Differences
S7 Active has a IP68 &
MIL-STD-810G certified
body
No fingerprint sensor
Galaxy S7
Edge
System LSI Exynos 8890 Galaxy S7 (System
LSI)
Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
Galaxy S6
Edge
System LSI Exynos 7420 Galaxy S6 Flat screen vs. Curved
screen
Galaxy S6
Edge
System LSI Exynos 7420 Galaxy S6 Edge+ Edge+ is larger
Galaxy S6
Edge
System LSI Exynos 7420 Galaxy Note 5 Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
Note 5 is larger
Note 5 includes stylus &
functionality to take
advantage of it for input
(not security related)
Galaxy S6
Edge
System LSI Exynos 7420 Galaxy S6 Active Curved screen vs. Flat
screen
S6 Active has a IP68 &
MIL-STD-810G certified
body
No fingerprint sensor
The full list of mobile devices which have been evaluated and which are compatible with the
VPN client can be found in the following table:
Device Name
Base Model
Number
Kernel
Version
Build
Number
Carrier Models
Galaxy S8 (Qualcomm) SM-G950 4.4.16 NRD90M U
Galaxy S8 (System LSI) SM-G950 4.4.13 NRD90M N, F
Galaxy S8 + (Qualcomm) SM-G955 4.4.16 NRD90M U
Galaxy S8 + (System LSI) SM-G955 4.4.13 NRD90M N, F
Galaxy S8 Active SM-G892 4.4.16 NRD90M A, None
Galaxy Tab S3
SM-T820 3.18.31 NRD90M None
SM-T825 3.18.31 NRD90M N, Y, None
SM-T827 3.18.31 NRD90M V, A, R4
Galaxy S7 (Qualcomm) SM-G930 3.18.31 NRD90M T, P, R4, V, A
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
6
Galaxy S7 (System LSI) SM-G930 3.18.14 NRD90M F, S, K, L
Galaxy S7 Edge (Qualcomm) SM-G935 3.18.31 NRD90M A, T, P, R4, V
Galaxy S7 Edge (System
LSI)
SM-G935 3.18.14 NRD90M F, S, K, L
Galaxy S7 Active SM-G891 3.18.31 NRD90M A, None
Galaxy S6 Edge+ SM-G928 3.10.61 NRD90M F, I, A, T, P, R4, V, S, K, L
Galaxy Note 5 SM-N920 3.10.61 NRD90M I, A, T, P, R4, V, S, K, L
Galaxy S6 SM-G920 3.10.61 NRD90M F, I, A, T, P, R4, V, S, K, L
Galaxy S6 Edge SM-G925 3.10.61 NRD90M F, I, A, T, P, R4, V, S, K, L
Galaxy S6 Active SM-G890 3.10.61 NRD90M A, None
3.2 Physical Boundaries
The TOE is a VPN Client executing on a multi-user mobile device based on Android 7.0 that
incorporates the Samsung Enterprise SDK. The method of use for the TOE is as a VPN client
for use within an enterprise environment where the configuration of the mobile device on
which the TOE executes is managed through a compliant device management solution.
The TOE platform communicates and interacts with 802.11-2012 Access Points and cellular
networks to establish network connectivity.
This evaluation does not include the underlying hardware and firmware or the device
management application that is implemented on the device.
4 Security Policy
This section summaries the security functionality of the TOE:
1. Cryptographic support
2. User data protection
3. Identification and authentication
4. Security Management
5. Protection of the TSF
6. Trusted path/channels
4.1 Cryptographic support
The IPsec implementation is the primary function of the TOE. IPSec is used by the TOE to
protect communication between itself and a VPN Gateway over an unprotected network.
With the exception of the IPsec implementation, the TOE relies upon its underlying platform
(evaluated against the Protection Profile For Mobile Device Fundamentals) for the
cryptographic services specified in this Security Target.
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
7
4.2 User data protection
The TOE ensures that residual information is protected from potential reuse in accessible
objects such as network packets.
4.3 Identification and authentication
The TOE platform provides the ability to use, store, and protect X.509 certificates and pre-
shared keys that are used for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) connections.
4.4 Security management
The TOE provides all the interfaces necessary to manage the security functions identified
throughout this Security Target. In particular, the IPsec VPN is fully configurable by a
combination of functions provided directly by the TOE and those available to the associated
VPN gateway.
4.5 Protection of the TSF
The TOE relies upon its underlying platform to perform self-tests that cover the TOE as well
as the functions necessary to securely update the TOE.
4.6 Trusted path/channels
The TOE is a VPN client that uses IPsec to established secure channels to corresponding
VPN gateways.
5 Assumptions
The Security Problem Definition, including the assumptions, may be found in the Protection
Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4, 21 October 2013
(IVPNCPP14). That information has not been reproduced here and the IVPNCPP14 should
be consulted if there is interest in that material.
6 Clarification of Scope
All evaluations (and all products) have limitations, as well as potential misconceptions that
need clarifying. This text covers some of the more important limitations and clarifications
of this evaluation. Note that:
1. As with any evaluation, this evaluation only shows that the evaluated configuration
meets the security claims made, with a certain level of assurance (the assurance
activities specified in the Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network
(VPN) Clients and performed by the evaluation team).
2. This evaluation covers only the specific product version identified in this document,
and not any earlier or later versions released or in process.
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
8
3. This evaluation did not specifically search for, nor attempt to exploit, vulnerabilities
that were not “obvious” or vulnerabilities to objectives not claimed in the ST. The
CEM defines an “obvious” vulnerability as one that is easily exploited with a
minimum of understanding of the TOE, technical sophistication and resources.
4. The functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional
requirements specified in the IVPNCPP14 and applicable Technical Decisions. Any
additional security related functional capabilities of the TOE were not covered by this
evaluation.
7 Documentation
The following documents were available with the TOE for evaluation:
 Samsung VPN Client on Galaxy Devices Guidance documentation, Version 3.0,
February 27, 2017
 Samsung VPN Client on Galaxy Devices VPN User Guidance Documentation,
Version 3.0, March 15, 2017
Any additional customer documentation delivered with the product or available through
download was not included in the scope of the evaluation and hence should not be relied
upon when using the products as evaluated.
8 IT Product Testing
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the Evaluation Team. It is
derived from information contained in the Detailed Test Report for Samsung VPN Client on
Galaxy Devices (IVPNCPP14), Version 0.2, May 3, 2017, which is not publically available.
The Assurance Activities Report for Samsung VPN Client on Galaxy Devices (IVPNCPP14),
Version 0.2, May 3, 2017 (AAR), provides a non-proprietary overview of testing and the
prescribed assurance activities.
The following diagrams depict the test environments used by the evaluators.
Figure 1 Evaluator Test Setup 1
Ubuntu
Linux
Windows
TOE Device
USB Connection
Network – Putty
Connection 10.0.0.144 (16.04)
or
10.0.0.12 (14.10)
10.0.0.58
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
9
8.1 Developer Testing
No evidence of developer testing is required in the assurance activities for this product.
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing
The evaluation team verified the product according to the Samsung VPN Client on Galaxy
Devices Guidance documentation, Version 3.0, February 27, 2017 and Samsung VPN Client
on Galaxy Devices VPN User Guidance documentation, Version 3.0, March 15, 2017
documents and ran the tests specified in the IVPNCPP14.
9 Evaluated Configuration
The evaluated configuration consists of the Samsung Galaxy Devices VPN Client
configured as specified in Samsung VPN Client on Galaxy Devices Guidance
documentation, Version 3.0, February 27, 2017.
10 Results of the Evaluation
The results of the assurance requirements are generally described in this section and are
presented in detail in the proprietary ETR. The reader of this document can assume that all
work units received a passing verdict.
Figure 2 Evaluator Test Setup 2
Linux
RADIU
S
Backtrack
Wireshark
Linux
Windows
Network – Putty
Connection
USB Connection
USB Connection
TOE Device
TOE Device
Evaluator Sniffing Configuration
Evaluator Direct Connect
Configuration
Access Point
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
10
A verdict for an assurance component is determined by the resulting verdicts assigned to the
corresponding evaluator action elements. The evaluation was conducted based upon CC
version 3.1 rev 4 and CEM version 3.1 rev 4. The evaluation determined the Samsung
Galaxy VPN Client devices TOE to be Part 2 extended, and to meet the SARs contained in
the IVPNCPP14.
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE)
The evaluation team applied each ASE CEM work unit. The ST evaluation ensured the ST
contains a description of the environment in terms of policies and assumptions, a statement
of security requirements claimed to be met by the Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android
7 (IVPNCPP14) products that are consistent with the Common Criteria, and product security
function descriptions that support the requirements.
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)
The evaluation team applied each ADV CEM work unit. The evaluation team assessed the
design documentation and found it adequate to aid in understanding how the TSF provides
the security functions. The design documentation consists of a functional specification
contained in the Security target and Guidance documents. Additionally the evaluator
performed the assurance activities specified in the IVPNCPP14 related to the examination of
the information contained in the TSS.
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD)
The evaluation team applied each AGD CEM work unit. The evaluation team ensured the
adequacy of the user guidance in describing how to use the operational TOE. Additionally,
the evaluation team ensured the adequacy of the administrator guidance in describing how
to securely administer the TOE. All of the guides were assessed during the design and testing
phases of the evaluation to ensure they were complete.
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
11
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC)
The evaluation team applied each ALC CEM work unit. The evaluation team found that the
TOE was identified.
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE)
The evaluation team applied each ATE CEM work unit. The evaluation team ran the set of
tests specified by the assurance activities in the IVPNCPP14 and recorded the results in a
Test Report, summarized in the AAR.
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)
The evaluation team applied each AVA CEM work unit. The vulnerability analysis is in the
Detailed Test Report (DTR) prepared by the evaluator. The vulnerability analysis includes
a public search for vulnerabilities. The public search for vulnerabilities did not uncover
any residual vulnerability.
The evaluator searched the National Vulnerability Database
(https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search) and Vulnerability Notes Database
(http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/) with the following search terms: “Samsung S8, Galaxy S8,
S8, Knox, Samsung, Android, strongswan, charon, libcharon, libstrongswan, and libhydra.”
The validator reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence
and justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was
conducted in accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached
by the evaluation team was justified.
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results
The evaluation team’s assessment of the evaluation evidence demonstrates that the claims in
the ST are met. Additionally, the evaluation team’s testing also demonstrated the accuracy
of the claims in the ST.
The validation team’s assessment of the evidence provided by the evaluation team is that it
demonstrates that the evaluation team followed the procedures defined in the CEM, and
correctly verified that the product meets the claims in the ST.
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
12
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations
The validators suggest that the consumer pay particular attention to the evaluated
configuration of the device(s). Those employing the Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on
Android 7 must follow the configuration instructions provided in the Operational Guidance
documentation listed above to ensure the evaluated configuration is established and
maintained. As such, operation in FIPS-validated mode is required. The functionality
evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional requirements specified in the
Security Target, and only the functionality implemented by the SFR’s within the Security
Target was evaluated. All other functionality provided by the devices, to include software
that was not part of the evaluated configuration, needs to be assessed separately and no
further conclusions can be drawn about their effectiveness.
The validators encourage the consumers of these products to understand the relationship
between the products and any functionality that may be provided via Mobile Device
Management solutions. This evaluation neither covers, nor endorses, the use of any particular
MDM solution and only the MDM interfaces of the products were exercised as part of the
evaluation.
A VPN client on a mobile device is only active when initiating a connection with the VPN
Gateway. Because of this, even if the VPN Gateway is configured for aggressive mode, it
will switch to main mode when it connects since the VPN client only supports main mode.
Thus, the VPN gateway cannot connect using aggressive mode. Previous evaluations have
required testing using aggressive mode, but the vendor and lab has maintained that it cannot
be tested and the client does not have to accept connections initiated by the VPN Gateway.
The TRRT agreed that the testing procedure to show the VPN client only supports main
mode is acceptable, but is not issuing a TD; it will be addressed in the next version of the
VPN Client EP.
12 Annexes
Not applicable
13 Security Target
The Security Target is identified as: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Galaxy VPN
Client on Android 7 (IVPNCPP14) Security Target, Version 1.1, March 29, 2017.
14 Glossary
The following definitions are used throughout this document:
 Common Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL). An IT security evaluation facility
accredited by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) and
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
13
approved by the CCEVS Validation Body to conduct Common Criteria-based
evaluations.
 Conformance. The ability to demonstrate in an unambiguous way that a given
implementation is correct with respect to the formal model.
 Evaluation. The assessment of an IT product against the Common Criteria using the
Common Criteria Evaluation Methodology to determine whether or not the claims made
are justified; or the assessment of a protection profile against the Common Criteria using
the Common Evaluation Methodology to determine if the Profile is complete, consistent,
technically sound and hence suitable for use as a statement of requirements for one or
more TOEs that may be evaluated.
 Evaluation Evidence. Any tangible resource (information) required from the sponsor or
developer by the evaluator to perform one or more evaluation activities.
 Feature. Part of a product that is either included with the product or can be ordered
separately.
 Target of Evaluation (TOE). A group of IT products configured as an IT system, or an
IT product, and associated documentation that is the subject of a security evaluation
under the CC.
 Validation. The process carried out by the CCEVS Validation Body leading to the issue
of a Common Criteria certificate.
 Validation Body. A governmental organization responsible for carrying out validation
and for overseeing the day-to-day operation of the NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation
and Validation Scheme.
15 Bibliography
The Validation Team used the following documents to produce this Validation Report:
[1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation: Part 1:
Introduction and General Model, Version 3.1, Revision 4, September 2012.
[2] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1, Revision 4, September 2012.
[3] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 4, September 2012.
[4] Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4, 21
October 2013
[5] Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7
(IVPNCPP14) (IVPNCPP14) Security Target, Version 1.1, March 29, 2017 (ST)
[6] Assurance Activity Report (IVPNCPP14) for Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on
Android 7 (IVPNCPP14) , Version 0.2, May 3, 2017 (AAR)
[7] Detailed Test Report (IVPNCPP14) for Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7
(IVPNCPP14) , Version 0.2, May 3, 2017 (DTR)
Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7 Validation Report Version 0.3, June 21, 2017
14
[8] Evaluation Technical Report for Samsung Galaxy VPN Client on Android 7
(IVPNCPP14), Version 0.2, May 3, 2017 (ETR)