National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform version 7.5
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-VID11376-2023
Dated: July 5, 2023
Version: 1.0
National Institute of Standards and Technology Department of Defense
Information Technology Laboratory ATTN: NIAP, Suite 6982
100 Bureau Drive 9800 Savage Road
Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Fort Meade, MD 20755-6982
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Validation Team
Lauren Brandt
Sheldon Durrant
Randy Heimann
Lisa Mitchell
Linda Morrison
Clare Parran
Lori Sarem
The MITRE Corporation
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
John Messiha
Cornelius Haley
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
Columbia, MD
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
iii
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary.................................................................................................... 1
2 Identification............................................................................................................... 2
3 Assumptions & Clarification of Scope ....................................................................... 4
4 Architectural Information ........................................................................................... 5
4.1 TOE Evaluated Platforms ................................................................................... 5
4.2 TOE Architecture................................................................................................ 5
4.3 Physical Boundaries............................................................................................ 6
5 Security Policy............................................................................................................ 7
5.1 Security audit ...................................................................................................... 7
5.2 Cryptographic support ........................................................................................ 7
5.3 Identification and authentication......................................................................... 7
5.4 Security management.......................................................................................... 7
5.5 Protection of the TSF.......................................................................................... 8
5.6 TOE access.......................................................................................................... 8
5.7 Trusted path/channels ......................................................................................... 8
6 Documentation............................................................................................................ 9
7 IT Product Testing .................................................................................................... 10
7.1 Developer Testing............................................................................................. 10
7.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing ............................................................. 10
8 Results of the Evaluation .......................................................................................... 11
8.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE).......................................................... 11
8.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)............................................................ 11
8.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD) ............................................... 11
8.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC)................................... 12
8.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE) ............... 12
8.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)....................................................... 12
8.7 Summary of Evaluation Results........................................................................ 12
9 Validator Comments/Recommendations .................................................................. 14
10 Annexes..................................................................................................................... 15
11 Security Target.......................................................................................................... 16
12 Glossary .................................................................................................................... 17
13 Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 18
List Of Tables
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers............................................................................................ 3
Table 2: Glossary.............................................................................................................. 17
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
1
1 Executive Summary
This report documents the assessment of the National Information Assurance Partnership
(NIAP) Validation team of the evaluation of IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform
solution provided by IBM Corporation. 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 Columbia, MD, United States of America, and was
completed in July 2023. 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 collaborative
Protection Profile for Network Devices, version 2.2e, 23 March 2020 (NDcPP22e).
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform version
7.5. The 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 5) for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security
Evaluation (Version 3.1, Rev 5). 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 IBM QRadar
Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5 Security Target, version 0.8, June 26, 2023 and
analysis performed by the Validation team.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
2
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
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:
• TOE: the fully qualified identifier of the product as evaluated.
• The 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.
Item Identifier
Evaluation Scheme United States NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
TOE IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5
Protection Profile collaborative Protection Profile for Network Devices, version 2.2e, 23 March
2020 (NDcPP22e)
ST IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5 Security Target, version
0.8, June 26, 2023
Evaluation Technical
Report
Evaluation Technical Report for IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform
Version 7.5, version 0.4, June 26, 2023
CC Version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,
Rev 5
Conformance Result CC Part 2 Extended, CC Part 3 Conformant
Sponsor IBM Corporation
Developer IBM Corporation
Common Criteria
Testing Lab (CCTL)
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
Columbia, MD
CCEVS Validators Lauren Brandt, Sheldon Durrant, Randy Heimann, Lisa Mitchell, Linda
Morrison, Clare Parran, Lori Sarem
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
3
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
4
3 Assumptions & Clarification of Scope
Assumptions
The Security Problem Definition, including the assumptions, may be found in the following
documents:
• collaborative Protection Profile for Network Devices, version 2.2e,
23 March 2020 (NDcPP22e)
That information has not been reproduced here and the NDcPP22e should be consulted if
there is interest in that material.
The scope of this evaluation was limited to the functionality and assurances covered in the
NDcPP22e as described for this TOE in the Security Target. Other functionality included in
the product was not assessed as part of this evaluation. All other functionality provided by
the devices needs to be assessed separately, and no further conclusions can be drawn about
their effectiveness.
Clarification of scope
All evaluations (and all products) have limitations, as well as potential misconceptions that
need clarification. This text covers some of the more important limitations and clarifications
of this evaluation. Note that:
• 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 collaborative Protection Profile for Network Devices and
performed by the evaluation team).
• This evaluation covers only the specific device models and software as identified in
this document, and not any earlier or later versions released or in process.
• Apart from the Admin Guide, additional customer documentation for the specific
Network Device models was not included in the scope of the evaluation and therefore
should not be relied upon when configuring or operating the device as evaluated.
• 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.
• The functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional
requirements specified in the NDcPP22e and applicable Technical Decisions. Any
additional security related functional capabilities of the TOE were not covered by this
evaluation.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
5
4 Architectural Information
Note: The following architectural description is based on the description presented in the
Security Target.
IBM QRadar SIEM consolidates log source event data from device endpoints and
applications that are distributed throughout a network. QRadar performs intermediate
normalization and correlation activities on this raw data and can forward data to another
network server when so configured. Communication with network peers for outbound
log/event data is accomplished using TLS protected communication channels. QRadar can
provide an X.509v3 certificate to authenticate itself as part of an outbound TLS connection.
The IBM All-In-One: Dell 3128C, model utilizes an x86 64-bit CPU architecture, with 4
network interface cards, and varying amounts of memory. The TOE runs on the All-In-One
device which uses an Intel® Xeon® Gold 5118 CPU without PAA.
The QRadar SIEM utilizes multiple cryptographic security kernel libraries internally,
IBMFIPSJCE, OpenSSL and GPG. The related CAVP algorithm certs are shown in tables
in the Security Target: Table 6-1 (OpenSSL) and Table 6-2 (IBMFIPSJCE).
QRadar provides its cryptographic features through a Java implementation (IBMFIPSJCE)
which is developed by IBM independently from QRadar. The OpenSSL library included in
the TOE is OpenSSL 1.0.2k-fips as provided by RedHat Enterprise Linux. Thus, all
cryptographic functions are provided by IBMFIPSJCE or OpenSSL.
4.1 TOE Evaluated Platforms
The TOE is a self-contained appliance running the QRadar SIEM in a Red Hat RHEL 7.9
environment using an Intel® Xeon® Gold 5118 CPU without PAA
4.2 TOE Architecture
The evaluated product is a single All-in-One device running QRadar SIEM with QFlow
enabled. A QRadar QFlow collector collects network traffic passively through network taps
and span ports. A QFlow collector can detect and collect information from networked
applications. The All-in-One device is a self-contained appliance running the QRadar SIEM
in a Red Hat RHEL 7.9 environment. The appliance makes only those interfaces offered by
QRadar available.
The IBM All-In-One: Dell 3128C, model utilizes an x86 64-bit CPU architecture, with 4
network interface cards, and varying amounts of memory.
The All-In-One device can connect to an external audit server allowing QRadar to transmit
audit and event data to an external server. All outbound audit data is transferred using TLS
protected communication channels.
An IBM QRadar All-In-One device provides a trusted path to remote administrators using
an HTTPS protected web GUI or SSH protected Command Line Interface (CLI). The
QRadar system offers a CLI at the local console and remotely via SSH as an administrative
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
6
interface. QRadar also offers a web interface for additional administrative functionality. A
single device will have four (4) network connections which can be used either for remote
management, receipt of event/syslog data, transmission of audit data, or other network
support traffic (e.g. DNS). A REST API interface is offered by QRadar and can be protected
by HTTPS/TLS.
4.3 Physical Boundaries
The TOE is composed of one physical component that is accessed and managed by
administrators from computers in the environment.
The TOE can be configured to forward its audit records to an external syslog server in the
environment. All audit records sent to the external syslog server are protected using a TLS
channel.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
7
5 Security Policy
This section summarizes the security functionality of the TOE:
1. Security audit
2. Cryptographic support
3. Identification and authentication
4. Security management
5. Protection of the TSF
6. TOE access
7. Trusted path/channels
5.1 Security audit
The TOE generates logs for a wide range of security relevant events. The TOE can be
configured to store the logs locally so they can be accessed by an administrator and also to
send the logs to a designated network peer using TLS to protect data while in transit. The
TOE is also capable of acting as a log storage device and receiving TLS protected
communication from network peers sending audit/event data.
5.2 Cryptographic support
The TOE utilizes NIST validated cryptographic algorithms to support key management,
random bit generation, encryption/decryption, digital signature and secure hashing and key-
hashing features in support of higher-level cryptographic protocols, including SSH and TLS.
5.3 Identification and authentication
The TOE requires users to be identified and authenticated before they can use functions
mediated by the TOE, with the exception of reading the login banner. The TOE authenticates
administrative users. In order for an administrative user to access the TOE, a user account
including a username and password must be created for the user.
5.4 Security management
The TOE provides Command Line Interface (CLI) commands and an HTTP over TLS
(HTTPS) Graphical User Interface (GUI) to access the wide range of security management
functions to manage its security policies. The TOE also offers HTTP over TLS protection
for REST API interfaces that can be used for administration. All administrative activity and
functions including security management commands are limited to authorized users (i.e.,
administrators) only after they have provided acceptable user identification and
authentication data to the TOE. The security management functions are controlled through
the use of privileges associated with roles that can be assigned to TOE users.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
8
5.5 Protection of the TSF
The TOE implements a number of features designed to protect itself to ensure the reliability
and integrity of its security features.
It protects particularly sensitive data such as stored passwords and cryptographic keys so that
they are not accessible even by an administrator. It also provides its own timing mechanism
to ensure that reliable time information is available (e.g., for log accountability).
Note that the TOE is a single appliance, and as such, no intra-TOE communication is subject
to any risks that may require special protection (e.g., cryptographic mechanisms).
The TOE includes functions to perform self-tests so that it might detect when it is failing. It
also includes support to verify signatures on product updates. The signature of an update is
verified against a known key for IBM which is installed in the TOE.
5.6 TOE access
The TOE can be configured to display a logon banner before a user session is established.
The TOE also enforces inactivity timeouts for local and remote sessions.
5.7 Trusted path/channels
The TOE protects communication channels between itself and remote administrators using
HTTPS/TLS and SSH. The SSH protocol is used to protect administrative connections
utilizing the TOE’s command line interface (CLI). Additionally, web-based GUI and REST
API interfaces are available for remote administration which are protected using HTTP over
TLS (HTTPS/TLS).
The TOE also protects communication with network peers using TLS. Protected
communication includes the TOE’s outbound connection to an external audit server.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
9
6 Documentation
The following documents were available with the TOE for evaluation:
• IBM QRadar Version 7.5 Common Criteria for NIAP Revision 1.0, June 8, 2023
Any additional customer documentation provided with the product, or that is available
online was not included in the scope of the evaluation and therefore should not to be relied
upon when configuring or operating the device as evaluated.
To use the product in the evaluated configuration, the product must be configured as
specified in the Guidance Documentation listed above. Consumers are encouraged to
download the configuration guides from the NIAP website to ensure the device is
configured as evaluated.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
10
7 IT Product Testing
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the Evaluation Team. It is
derived from information contained in the proprietary Detailed Test Report for IBM QRadar
Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5, Version 0.3, June 20, 2023 (DTR), as
summarized in the evaluation Assurance Activity Report (AAR).
7.1 Developer Testing
No evidence of developer testing is required in the assurance activities for this product.
7.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing
The evaluation team verified the product according to a Common Criteria Certification
document and ran the tests specified in the NDcPP22e including the tests associated with
optional requirements.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
11
8 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
assurance activities and work units received a passing verdict.
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 5 and CEM version 3.1 rev 5. The evaluation determined the QRadar Security
Intelligence Platform TOE to be Part 2 extended, and to meet the SARs contained in the
NDcPP22e.
8.1 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 IBM QRadar Security Intelligence
Platform 7.5 products that are consistent with the Common Criteria, and product security
function descriptions that support the requirements.
The Validators 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.
8.2 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 NDcPP22e related to the examination of
the information contained in the TSS.
The Validators 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.
8.3 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.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
12
The Validators 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.
8.4 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 Validators 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.
8.5 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 NDcPP22e and recorded the results in a Test
Report, summarized in the AAR.
The Validators 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.
8.6 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/) on June 8, 2023 with the following search terms: “QRadar”,
“Openssl”, “seim”, “ibmfipsjce”, “TLS”, “SSH”, “Dell 3128C”, “Xeon Gold 5118”.
The Validators 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.
8.7 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.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
13
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.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
14
9 Validator Comments/Recommendations
The Validation team notes that the evaluated configuration is dependent upon the TOE
being configured per the evaluated configuration instructions in the IBM QRadar Version
7.5 Common Criteria for NIAP Revision 1.0, Version 1.0, June 20, 2023 (AGD). No
versions of the TOE and software, either earlier or later were evaluated.
Please note that the functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional
requirements specified in the Security Target. Other functionality included in the product
was not assessed as part of this evaluation. All other functionality provided by devices in
the operational environment need to be assessed separately, and no further conclusions can
be drawn about their effectiveness.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
15
10 Annexes
Not applicable
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
16
11 Security Target
The Security Target is identified as: IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5
Security Target, Version 0.8, June 26, 2023.
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
17
12 Glossary
The following definitions are used throughout this document:
Term Definition
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL) An IT security evaluation facility accredited by
the National Voluntary Laboratory
Accreditation Program (NVLAP) and 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.
Table 2: Glossary
IBM QRadar Security Validation Report Version 1.0, July 5, 2023
Intelligence Platform version 7.5
18
13 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 5, April 2017.
[2] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[3] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017.
[4] collaborative Protection Profile for Network Devices, version 2.2e, 23 March 2020
(NDcPP22e).
[5] IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5 Security Target, Version 0.8,
June 26, 2023 (ST).
[6] IBM QRadar Version 7.5 Common Criteria for NIAP Revision 1.0, Version 1.0, June
20, 2023 (AGD).
[7] Assurance Activity Report for IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version
7.5, Version 0.4, June 26, 2023 (AAR).
[8] Detailed Test Report for IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform Version 7.5,
Version 0.3, June 20, 2023 (DTR).
[9] Evaluation Technical Report for IBM QRadar Security Intelligence Platform
Version 7.5, Version 0.4, June 26, 2023 (ETR)