Red Hat Enterprise Linux
Version 5.1
Security Target
for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Version: 1.9
Last Update: 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
atsec is a trademark of atsec GmbH
SGI and the SGI Logo are registered trademarks of Silicon Graphics, Inc.
IBM is a registered trademark of International Business Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries, or
both.
Red Hat and the Red Hat logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Red Hat, Inc. in the United States, other
countries, or both.
Intel, Xeon, and Pentium are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both.
Java and all Java-based products are trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc., in the United States, other countries, or
both.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
UNIX is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the United States and other countries.
This document is provided AS IS with no express or implied warranties. Use the information in this document at your
own risk.
This Security Target is derived from the “SuSE Linux Enterprise Server V 8 with Service Pack 3 Security Target with
CAPP compliance”, version 2.7 sponsored by the IBM Corporation for the EAL3 evaluation. This original Security
Target is copyrighted by IBM Corporation and atsec information security GmbH.
This document may be reproduced or distributed in any form without prior permission provided the copyright notice
is retained on all copies. Modified versions of this document may be freely distributed provided that they are clearly
identified as such, and this copyright is included intact.
Copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by atsec Corporation, and SGI Corporation or its wholly owned
subsidiaries.
Page 2 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Table of Content
1 ST Introduction............................................................................................................................................................7
1.1 ST Structure...........................................................................................................................................................7
1.2 Terminology.........................................................................................................................................................7
1.3 ST Reference and TOE Reference.........................................................................................................................8
1.4 TOE Overview.......................................................................................................................................................8
1.4.1 TOE Type.......................................................................................................................................................8
1.4.2 Intended Method of Use ................................................................................................................................8
1.4.3 Major Security Features..................................................................................................................................9
1.5 TOE Description..................................................................................................................................................11
1.5.1 Software.......................................................................................................................................................12
1.5.2 Configurations..............................................................................................................................................18
2 Conformance Claims..................................................................................................................................................21
2.1 Common Criteria.................................................................................................................................................21
2.2 Packages..............................................................................................................................................................21
2.3 Protection Profiles...............................................................................................................................................21
2.3.1 PP Tailoring..................................................................................................................................................21
3 Security Problem Definition......................................................................................................................................23
3.1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................23
3.2 Threats................................................................................................................................................................23
3.2.1 Threats countered by the TOE.....................................................................................................................23
3.2.2 Threats to be countered by measures within the TOE environment..............................................................23
3.3 Organizational Security Policies.........................................................................................................................24
3.4 Assumptions.......................................................................................................................................................25
3.4.1 Physical Aspects..........................................................................................................................................25
3.4.2 Personnel Aspects........................................................................................................................................25
3.4.3 Procedural Aspects (LSPP-mode only)........................................................................................................25
3.4.4 Connectivity Aspects...................................................................................................................................25
4 Security Objectives....................................................................................................................................................27
4.1 Security Objectives for the TOE.........................................................................................................................27
4.2 Security Objectives for the TOE Environment...................................................................................................27
4.3 Security Objective Rationale...............................................................................................................................28
4.3.1 Security Objectives Coverage......................................................................................................................28
4.3.2 Security Objectives Sufficiency....................................................................................................................29
5 Extended Components Definition..............................................................................................................................32
6 Security Requirements................................................................................................................................................33
6.1 TOE Security Functional Requirements.............................................................................................................33
6.1.1 Security Audit (FAU)...................................................................................................................................33
6.1.2 Cryptographic Support (FCS)......................................................................................................................40
6.1.3 User Data Protection (FDP)..........................................................................................................................42
6.1.4 Identification and Authentication (FIA)......................................................................................................48
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 3 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.5 Security Management (FMT).......................................................................................................................50
6.1.6 Protection of the TOE Security Functions (FPT).........................................................................................53
6.1.7 TOE Access (FTA).......................................................................................................................................54
6.1.8 Trusted path/channels (FTP).........................................................................................................................55
6.2 Security Requirements for the IT Environment...................................................................................................55
6.3 Security Requirements for the Non-IT Environment..........................................................................................55
6.4 Security Requirements Rationale.........................................................................................................................55
6.4.1 Internal Consistency of Requirements.........................................................................................................55
6.4.2 Security Requirements Coverage.................................................................................................................57
6.4.3 Security Requirements Dependency Analysis..............................................................................................61
6.5 TOE Security Assurance Requirements..............................................................................................................63
7 TOE Summary Specification.....................................................................................................................................64
7.1 Security Enforcing Components Overview........................................................................................................64
7.1.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................64
7.1.2 Kernel Services............................................................................................................................................64
7.1.3 Non-Kernel TSF Services.............................................................................................................................65
7.1.4 Network Services........................................................................................................................................65
7.1.5 Security Policy Overview.............................................................................................................................65
7.1.6 TSF Structure ..............................................................................................................................................66
7.1.7 TSF Interfaces.............................................................................................................................................66
7.1.8 Secure and Non-Secure States ....................................................................................................................67
7.2 Description of the Security Enforcing Functions...............................................................................................67
7.2.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................67
7.2.2 Identification and Authentication (IA).........................................................................................................68
7.2.3 Audit (AU)...................................................................................................................................................71
7.2.4 Discretionary Access Control (DA).............................................................................................................72
7.2.5 Role-Based Access Control (RA) (LSPP mode only)...................................................................................78
7.2.6 Mandatory Access Control (MA) (LSPP mode only)...................................................................................79
7.2.7 Object Reuse (OR)......................................................................................................................................81
7.2.8 Security Management (SM)........................................................................................................................82
7.2.9 Secure Communication (SC)........................................................................................................................85
7.2.10 TSF Protection (TP)...................................................................................................................................87
8 Abbreviations.............................................................................................................................................................93
Page 4 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Document History
Version Date Changes Author
1.0 2007-01-21 Initial Version Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.1 2007-02-02 Restructured chapter 1.
Updated SAR rationale,
Move the rationales to respective chapters
Trang Huynh, atsec
1.2 2007-02-16 Remove redundant DAC section for sysfs; delete
inappropriate FMT_REV.1 “Object attributes”
mappings
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.3 2007-02-16 Evaluation of RHEL5 Server only Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.4 2007-02-21 Rearrangement and minor changes based on
evaluator feedback
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.5 2007-02-28 Rearrangement, deletions, and changes for 3.1
compliance and others based on evaluator
feedback
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.6 2007-03-28 Address VOR comments. New package list,
audit notification mechanisms, architecture
diagram
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.7 2007-08-21 change from RHEL5 “version 5” to “version
5.1”
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.8 2008-02-27 update audit notification mechanism description,
minor changes based on evaluator feedback.
Klaus Weidner, atsec
1.9 2008-02-29 update ADV_ARC.1 mapping in chp 7 Klaus Weidner, atsec
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 5 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
References
[CC] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
CCIMB-2006-09-001 to CCIMB-2006-09-003, Version 3.1, September 2006, Part 1 to 3
[CEM] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation, CCIMB-2006-09-
004, Evaluation Methodology, Version 3.1, September 2006
[GUIDE] ISO/IEC PDTR 15446 Title: Information technology – Security techniques – Guide for the
production of protection profiles and security targets, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27 N 2449, 2000-
01-04
[CAPP] Controlled Access Protection Profile, Issue 1.d, 8 October 1999
[LSPP] Labeled Security Protection Profile, Issue 1.b, 8 October 1999
[RBACPP] Role-Based Access Control Protection Profile, Version 1.0, July 30, 1998
[SSLv3] The SSL Protocol Version 3.0, http://wp.netscape.com/eng/ssl3/draft302.txt
[SSH-AUTH] RFC 4252: The Secure Shell (SSH) Authentication Protocol,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4252.txt
[SSH-TRANS] RFC 4253: The Secure Shell (SSH) Transport Layer Protocol,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4253.txt
[HMAC] RFC 2104: HMAC: Keyed-Hashing for Message Authentication,
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2104.txt
[TLS-AES] RFC 3268: Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Ciphersuites for Transport Layer Security
(TLS), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3268.txt
[IKE] RFC 2409: The Internet Key Exchange (IKE), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2409.txt
[IPSEC] RFC 2401: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2101.txt
[TARGET] Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP compliance
(this document)
[X.509] ITU-T RECOMMENDATION X.509 | ISO/IEC 9594-8: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY -
OPEN SYSTEMS INTERCONNECTION - THE DIRECTORY: PUBLIC-KEYAND
ATTRIBUTE CERTIFICATE FRAMEWORKS
Page 6 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
1 ST Introduction
This Security Target has been derived from the Security Target used for the previous evaluation of Red Hat Enterprise
Linux AS Version 4 Update 4 with the lspp-eal4-config-sgi package, also sponsored by SGI. The major changes to
this Security Target are:
 Updated kernel and system software
 Add the LSPP and RBAC protection profiles
The TOE includes the hardware and firmware used to run the software components.
This security target documents the security characteristics of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Server operating system
(In the rest of this document we will use the term “Red Hat Enterprise Linux” as a synonym for this).
1.1 ST Structure
The structure of this document is as defined by [CC] Part 1 Annex A.
 Section 1 is the TOE Overview Description.
 Section 2 provides the conformance claims.
 Section 3 provides the Security Problem Definition
 Section 4 provides the security objectives
 Section 5 provides the extended components definition
 Section 6 provides the security requirements
 Section 7 provides the TOE summary specifications
1.2 Terminology
This section contains definitions of technical terms that are used with a meaning specific to this document. Terms
defined in the [CC] are not reiterated here, unless stated otherwise.
Administrative User: This term refers to a user in one of the defined administrative roles of a Red Hat Enterprise
Linux system. The TOE defines a set of administrative roles where each role has specific administrative authoritities.
Splitting the administrative authorities among different roles allows for a more controlled operational environment
without the need for a single user to have all administrative authorities.
Authentication data: This includes the password for each user of the product. Authentication mechanisms using other
authentication data than a password are not supported in the evaluated configuration.
Classification: A sensitivity label associated with an object.
Clearance: A sensitivity label associated with a subject or user.
Data: arbitrary bit sequences in computer memory or on storage media.
Dominate: Sensitivity label A dominates sensitivity label B if the hierarchical level of A is greater than or equal to the
hierarchical level of B, and the category set of label A is a proper subset of or equal to the category set of label B. (cf.
Incomparable sensitivity labels)
Incomparable: Security labels A and B are incomparable if A does not dominate B and B does not dominate A, for
example if neither of their category sets is a subset of the other.
Information: any data held within a server, including data in transit between systems.
Named Object: In Red Hat Enterprise Linux, those objects that are subject to discretionary, role based or mandatory
access control. This includes all objects except memory objects.
Named Object Security Attributes: In Red Hat Enterprise Linux those attributes are the object type and (in LSPP
mode) the sensitivity label of the object.
Object: In Red Hat Enterprise Linux, objects belong to one of the following categories: file system objects, IPC
objects, memory objects, and network objects. Processes are objects when they are the target of signal-related system
calls.
Product: The term product is used to define software components that comprise the Red Hat Enterprise Linux system.
Role: A role represents a set of actions that an authorized user, upon assuming the role, can perform.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 7 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Sensitivity Label: When operated in LSPP mode the TOE attaches a sensitivity label to each named object. This label
consists of a hierarchical sensitivity level and a set of zero or more categeories. In LSPP mode the policy defines the
number and names of the sensitivity levels and categories.
Subject: There are two classes of subjects in Red Hat Enterprise Linux:
 untrusted internal subject - this is a Red Hat Enterprise Linux process running on behalf of some user,
running outside of the TSF (for example, with no privileges).
 trusted internal subject - this is a Red Hat Enterprise Linux process running as part of the TSF. Examples
are service daemons and the process implementing the identification and authentication of users.
System: Includes the hardware, software and firmware components of the Red Hat Enterprise Linux product which
are connected/networked together and configured to form a usable system.
Target of Evaluation (TOE): The TOE is defined as the Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system, running and
tested on the hardware and firmware specified in this Security Target. The BootPROM firmware as well as the
hardware form part of the TOE as required by the NIAP CC interpretation.
Type: The TOE allows to assign a defined type to a subject (process) and to an object and enforce access control based
on those types. Types are used to model role based access control.
User: Any individual/person who has a unique user identifier and who interacts with the Red Hat Enterprise Linux
product.
User Security Attributes: As defined by functional requirement FIA_ATD.1, the term ‘security attributes’includes the
following as a minimum: user identifier; group memberships; user authentication data; and user roles. In LSPP mode
this also includes the user clearance which defines the maximum sensitivity label a user can have access to.
1.3 ST Reference and TOE Reference
Title: SGI Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1
Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance; the specification of RPM packages included into the TOE is
given in section 1.5.1.
Version: 1.9
Authors: Klaus Weidner
Publication Date: 2008-03-31
Keywords: Linux, Open Source, general-purpose operating system, POSIX, UNIX, multi-level security.
1.4 TOE Overview
The TOE is a Linux based multi-user multi-tasking operating system. The TOE may provide services to several users
at the same time. After successful login, the users have access to a general computing environment, allowing the start-
up of user applications, issuing user commands at shell level, creating and accessing files. The TOE provides adequate
mechanisms to separate the users and protect their data. Privileged commands are restricted to administrative users.
This evaluation focuses on the use of the TOE as a server or a network of servers. Therefore a graphical user interface
has not been included as part of the evaluation. In addition the evaluation assumes the operation of the network of
servers in a non-hostile environment.
1.4.1 TOE Type
Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a highly-configurable Linux-based operating system which has been developed to
provide a good level of security as required in commercial environments.
1.4.2 Intended Method of Use
The TOE can operate in two different modes of operation called “CAPP mode” and “LSPP mode”. In CAPP mode the
SELinux security module does not enforce a mandatory access control policy and does not recognize sensitivity labels
of subjects and objects. SELinux can either be disabled completely, or enabled with a non-MLS policy such as the
“targeted” or “strict” policies which only add additional restrictions to the CAPP requirements without interfering
with the “root” administrator role. In this mode the TOE enforces all security requirements of [CAPP] but does not
enforce the requirements of [LSPP] and [RBACPP].
In LSPP mode the SELinux security module is configured to enforce the mandatory access control policy based on
the labels of subjects and objects as required by [LSPP], and the requirements of [RBACPP]. In LSPP mode rules are
defined to assign sensitivity labels to subjects and objects and to implement the information flow mandatory access
Page 8 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
control policy defined in [LSPP]. Note that a system in LSPP mode can optionally be configured to use a single
sensitivity label for all subjects and objects to provide an operational mode equivalent to pure RBAC with no
mandatory access control.
The TOE is intended to operate in a networked environment with other instantiations of the TOE as well as other well-
behaved client systems operating within the same management domain. All those systems need to be configured in
accordance with a defined common security policy. Communication links can be protected against loss of
confidentiality and integrity by security functions of the TOE based on cryptographic protection mechanisms.
The TOE permits one or more processors and attached peripheral and storage devices to be used by multiple users to
perform a variety of functions requiring controlled shared access to the data stored on the system. Such installations
are typical for workgroup or enterprise computing systems accessed by users local to, or with otherwise protected
access to, the computer system.
It is assumed that responsibility for the safeguarding of the data protected by the TOE can be delegated to the TOE
users. All data is under the control of the TOE. The data is stored in named objects, and the TOE can associate with
each named object a description of the access rights to that object.
1.4.3 Major Security Features
The primary security features of the TOE are:
 Identification and Authentication
 Audit
 Discretionary Access Control
 Mandatory Access Control (LSPP mode only)
 Role-Based Access Control (LSPP mode only)
 Object reuse functionality
 Security Management
 Secure Communication
 TSF Protection.
These primary security features are supported by domain separation and reference mediation, which ensure that the
features are always invoked and cannot be bypassed.
1.4.3.1 Identification and Authentication
All individual users are assigned a unique user identifier within the single host system that forms the TOE. This user
identifier is used together with the attributes and roles assigned to the user as the basis for access control decisions.
The TOE authenticates the claimed identity of the user before allowing the user to perform any further actions. The
TOE internally maintains a set of identifiers associated with processes, which are derived from the unique user
identifier upon login of the user. Some of those identifiers may change during the execution of the process according
to a policy implemented by the TOE.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux provides identification and authentication using pluggable authentication modules (PAM)
based upon user passwords. The quality of the passwords used can be enforced through configuration options
controlled by Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Other authentication methods (e. g. Kerberos authentication, token based
authentication) that are supported by Red Hat Enterprise Linux as pluggable authentication modules are not part of the
evaluated configuration. Functions to ensure medium password strength and limit the use of the su command and
restrict root login to specific terminals are also included. When operating in LSPP mode users may select the
sensitivity label of their session from a range of labels allowed for them to use.
The TSF software enforces restrictions when establishing user sessions to ensure that the set of active roles available
to that user is limited to those roles for which the user is authorized, and ensures that sessions can only be established
with a nonempty set of active roles.
1.4.3.2 Audit
The TOE provides an audit capability that allows generating audit records for security critical events. The
administrative user can select which events are audited and for which users auditing is active. A list of events that can
be audited is defined in chapter 5 and 6.
The TOE provides tools that help the administrative user extract specific types of audit events, audit events for
specific users, audit events related to specific file system objects, or audit events within a specific time frame from the
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 9 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
overall audit records collected by the TOE. The audit records are stored in ASCII text, no conversion of the
information into human readable form is necessary.
The audit system detects when the capacity of the audit trail exceeds configurable thresholds, and the system
administrator can define actions to be taken when the threshold is exceeded. The possible actions include executing an
administrator-defined script, generating a syslog message to inform the administrator, switching the system to single
user mode (this prevents all user-initiated auditable actions), or halting the system.
The audit function also ensures that no audit records get lost due to exhaustion of the internal audit buffers. Processes
that try to create an audit record while the internal audit buffers are full will be halted until the required resources are
available again. In the unlikely case of unrecoverable resource exhaustion, the kernel audit component initiates a
kernel panic to prevent all further auditable events.
The audit system also records the sensitivity labels of subjects and objects as well as the role that has allowed access
when the TOE operates in LSPP mode.
1.4.3.3 Discretionary Access Control
Discretionary Access Control (DAC) restricts access to file system objects based on Access Control Lists (ACLs) that
include the standard UNIX permissions for user, group and others. Access control mechanisms also protect IPC
objects from unauthorized access.
Red Hat Enterprise Linux includes the ext3 file system, which supports POSIX ACLs. This allows defining access
rights to files within this type of file system down to the granularity of a single user.
IPC objects use permission bits for discretionary access control.
1.4.3.4 Mandatory Access Control (LSPP mode only)
Mandatory access control (MAC) restricts access to file system objects, IPC objects and network objects based on
labels attached to those objects as part of their security context managed by SELinux. The label is compared to the
security label of the subject that attempts to access/use the object. The mandatory access control includes a fixed set of
rules based on the labels of the subject and the object and the type of access attempted that determine if the subject
may access the object in the attempted way. Mandatory access control checks are performed in addition to the
discretionary access control checks and access is granted only if access is granted by both the mandatory and the
discretionary access control policies.
1.4.3.5 Role-Based Access Control (LSPP mode only)
Roles in the TOE are defined via types and access to types. A “type” is a security attribute given to an object or a
process. The type of a process is commonly called a “domain”. Policy rules define how domains may interact with
objects and with other domains.
Roles can be assigned to users and define which user can have access to which domain. A user may have several roles
assigned to him but will always act in one role only. To change from his current role to another role that has been
assigned to him he needs to use the newrole command which requires re-authentication. This prohibits that the user’s
role is changed by a malicious program without the user knowing this. In addition the transition between roles may be
restricted by the policy.
The TOE has a hierarchical set of roles defined in the policy. Those are:
 Root administrator: This is the classical superuser role which is hierarchical to all other roles
 System process: This is a role that should be assigned to specific system processes like daemons
 System administrator: This is a role for general system administration
 Security administrator: This is a role for the administration of security (policy and security contexts)
 Staff: This is a user role for users allowed to use the newrole and su commands
 User: This is a general user role without being allowed to use the newrole and su commands
 Audit administrator: This is a role for administration of the audit policy and the evaluation of audit records
1.4.3.6 Object Reuse
File system objects as well as memory and IPC objects will be cleared before they can be reused by a process
belonging to a different user.
Page 10 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
1.4.3.7 Security Management
The management of the security critical parameters of the TOE is performed by administrative users. A set of
commands that require root privileges are used for system management. Security parameters are stored in specific
files that are protected by the access control mechanisms of the TOE against unauthorized access by users that are not
administrative users.
In CAPP and LSPP modes security management can be split between different roles.
1.4.3.8 Secure Communication
The TOE supports secure communication with other systems via the SSH v2.0 and SSL v3 protocol. Communication
via those protocols is protected against unauthorized disclosure and modification via cryptographic mechanisms. The
TOE also allows for secure authentication of the communicating parties using the SSL v3 protocol with client and
server authentication. This allows establishing a secure communication channel between different machines running
the TOE even over an insecure network. The SSL v3 protocol can be used to tunnel otherwise unprotected protocols
in a way that allows an application to secure its TCP based communication with other servers (provided the protocol
uses a single TCP port).
In LSPP mode, the TOE supports labeled network communication using the CIPSO and labeled IPSec protocols.
(IPSec is included for the purpose of associating MLS level information with network data only, not for
confidentiality or integrity.)
1.4.3.9 TSF Protection
While in operation, the kernel software and data are protected by the hardware memory protection mechanisms. The
memory and process management components of the kernel ensure a user process cannot access kernel storage or
storage belonging to other processes.
Non-kernel TSF software and data are protected by DAC and (in LSPP mode) MAC and process isolation
mechanisms. In the evaluated configuration, the reserved user ID root owns the directories and files that define the
TSF configuration. In general, files and directories containing internal TSF data (e.g., configuration files, batch job
queues) are also protected from reading by DAC and (in LSPP mode) MAC permissions.
The TOE including the hardware and firmware components are required to be physically protected from unauthorized
access. The system kernel mediates all access to hardware components that are protected from direct access by user
programs. A user process may execute unprivileged instructions and read or write to memory and processor regsister
within the bounds defined by the kernel for the user process without those types of access being mediated by the
kernel. All other types of access to hardware resources by user processes can only be performed by requests (in the
form of system calls) to the kernel.
The TOE provides a tool that allows an administrative user to check the correct operation of the underlying hardware.
This tool performs tests to check the system memory, the memory protection features of the underlying processor and
the correct separation between user and supervisor state.
The TOE security features are supported by domain separation and reference mediation, which ensure that the features
are always invoked and cannot be bypassed.
1.5 TOE Description
The target of evaluation (TOE) is the operating system product “Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Server” (also referred to
in this document as “Red Hat Enterprise Linux”).
Red Hat Enterprise Linux is a general purpose, multi-user, multi-tasking Linux based operating system. It provides a
platform for a variety of applications in the governmental and commercial environment. Red Hat Enterprise Linux is
available on a broad range of computer systems, ranging from departmental servers to multi-processor enterprise
servers and and small server type computer systems.
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux evaluation covers a potentially distributed, but closed network of servers running the
evaluated versions and configurations of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. The hardware platforms selected for the
evaluation consist of machines which are available when the evaluation has completed and to remain available for a
substantial period of time afterwards.
The TOE Security Functions (TSF) consist of functions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux that run in kernel mode plus
some trusted processes. These are the functions that enforce the security policy as defined in this Security Target.
Tools and commands executed in user mode that are used by an administrative user need also to be trusted to manage
the system in a secure way. But as with other operating system evaluations they are not considered to be part of this
TSF.
The hardware, the BootProm firmware and potentially other firmware layers between the hardware and Red Hat
Enterprise Linux are considered to be part of the TOE.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 11 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The TOE includes installation from CDROM and from a local hard disk partition.
The TOE includes standard networking applications, such as ftp, stunnel and ssh. It also supports the use of IPsec for
exchange of labeled data.
System administration tools include the standard commands. A graphical user interface for system administration or
any other operation is not included in the evaluated configuration.
The TOE environment also includes applications that are not evaluated, but are used as unprivileged tools to access
public system services. For example a network server using a port above 1024 may be used as a normal application
running without root privileges on top of the TOE. The additional documentation specific for the evaluated
configuration provides guidance how to set up such application on the TOE in a secure way.
1.5.1 Software
The Target of Evaluation is based on the following system software:
 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 Server
The TOE and its documentation are supplied on CD-ROM except for the update which needs to be downloaded from
the Red Hat web site. Updates are delivered via RedHat’s up2date client. This package contains the additional user
and administrator documentation, all packages that have been updated to fix problems and scripts that can be used for
the secure installation process. The user needs to verify the integrity and authenticity of those packages using the
standard package verification procedure as described in the manuals distributed with the product.
The following list shows the packages that make up the TOE in the evaluated configuration. This includes packages
that contribute to the TSF as well as packages that contain untrusted user programs from the distribution. Note that
additional untrusted user programs may be installed and used as long as they are not setuid or setgid to root.
The list contains the packages with their version numbers, binary architectures, and the name of the corresponding
source code package. A numbered suffix (such as “#2”) indicates that multiple binary versions of the same package
are installed, typically for 32-bit and 64-bit versions of libraries.
This package list is based on information generated by running the following command:
rpm -qa --qf='%{NAME} %{VERSION}-%{RELEASE} %{ARCH} %{SOURCERPM}\n'
Table 1-1: Software packages
--PkgArch----
RPM name Version ia64 x86_64 Source
Deployment_Guide-en-US 5.1.0-11 noarch noarch Deployment_Guide
GConf2 2.14.0-9.el5 ia64 x86_64 GConf2
MAKEDEV 3.23-1.2 ia64 x86_64 MAKEDEV
NetworkManager 0.6.4-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 NetworkManager
ORBit2 2.14.3-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 ORBit2
OpenIPMI 2.0.6-5.el5.4 ia64 x86_64 OpenIPMI
OpenIPMI-libs 2.0.6-5.el5.4 ia64 x86_64 OpenIPMI
SysVinit 2.86-14 ia64 x86_64 SysVinit
acl 2.2.39-2.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 acl
acpid 1.0.4-5 ia64 x86_64 acpid
aide 0.13.1-2.0.4.el5 ia64 x86_64 aide
amtu 1.0.4-4 ia64 x86_64 amtu
anacron 2.3-45.el5 ia64 x86_64 anacron
aspell 0.60.3-7.1 ia64 i386 aspell
aspell#2 0.60.3-7.1 - x86_64 aspell
aspell-en 6.0-2.1 ia64 x86_64 aspell-en
at 3.1.8-82.fc6 ia64 x86_64 at
atk 1.12.2-1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 atk
attr 2.4.32-1.1 ia64 x86_64 attr
audit 1.5.5-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 audit
audit-libs 1.5.5-7.el5 ia64 i386 audit
audit-libs#2 1.5.5-7.el5 - x86_64 audit
audit-libs-devel 1.5.5-7.el5 ia64 i386 audit
audit-libs-devel#2 1.5.5-7.el5 - x86_64 audit
audit-libs-python 1.5.5-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 audit
authconfig 5.3.12-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 authconfig
autoconf 2.59-12 noarch noarch autoconf
autofs 5.0.1-0.rc2.55 ia64 x86_64 autofs
automake 1.9.6-2.1 noarch noarch automake
basesystem 8.0-5.1.1 noarch noarch basesystem
bash 3.1-16.1 ia64 x86_64 bash
bc 1.06-21 ia64 x86_64 bc
beecrypt 4.1.2-10.1.1 ia64 x86_64 beecrypt
bind-libs 9.3.3-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 bind
bind-utils 9.3.3-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 bind
binutils 2.17.50.0.6-5.el5 ia64 x86_64 binutils
bison 2.3-2.1 ia64 x86_64 bison
Page 12 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
bluez-gnome 0.5-5.fc6 ia64 x86_64 bluez-gnome
bluez-libs 3.7-1 ia64 x86_64 bluez-libs
bluez-utils 3.7-2 ia64 x86_64 bluez-utils
bzip2 1.0.3-3 ia64 x86_64 bzip2
bzip2-libs 1.0.3-3 ia64 x86_64 bzip2
cairo 1.2.4-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 cairo
ccid 1.0.1-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 ccid
checkpolicy 1.33.1-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 checkpolicy
chkconfig 1.3.30.1-1 ia64 x86_64 chkconfig
chkfontpath 1.10.1-1.1 ia64 x86_64 chkfontpath
conman 0.1.9.2-8.el5 ia64 x86_64 conman
coolkey 1.1.0-5.el5 ia64 i386 coolkey
coolkey#2 1.1.0-5.el5 - x86_64 coolkey
coreutils 5.97-12.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 coreutils
cpio 2.6-20 ia64 x86_64 cpio
cpp 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gcc
cpuspeed 1.2.1-1.48.el5 ia64 x86_64 cpuspeed
cracklib 2.8.9-3.3 ia64 i386 cracklib
cracklib#2 2.8.9-3.3 - x86_64 cracklib
cracklib-dicts 2.8.9-3.3 ia64 x86_64 cracklib
crash 4.0-4.6.1 ia64 x86_64 crash
crontabs 1.10-8 noarch noarch crontabs
cryptsetup-luks 1.0.3-2.2.el5 ia64 i386 cryptsetup-luks
cryptsetup-luks#2 1.0.3-2.2.el5 - x86_64 cryptsetup-luks
cups 1.2.4-11.14.el5 ia64 x86_64 cups
cups-libs 1.2.4-11.14.el5 ia64 i386 cups
cups-libs#2 1.2.4-11.14.el5 - x86_64 cups
curl 7.15.5-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 curl
cvs 1.11.22-5.el5 ia64 x86_64 cvs
cyrus-sasl 2.1.22-4 ia64 x86_64 cyrus-sasl
cyrus-sasl-devel 2.1.22-4 ia64 x86_64 cyrus-sasl
cyrus-sasl-lib 2.1.22-4 ia64 i386 cyrus-sasl
cyrus-sasl-lib#2 2.1.22-4 - x86_64 cyrus-sasl
cyrus-sasl-plain 2.1.22-4 ia64 i386 cyrus-sasl
cyrus-sasl-plain#2 2.1.22-4 - x86_64 cyrus-sasl
db4 4.3.29-9.fc6 ia64 i386 db4
db4#2 4.3.29-9.fc6 - x86_64 db4
dbus 1.0.0-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 dbus
dbus-glib 0.70-5 ia64 x86_64 dbus-glib
dbus-python 0.70-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 dbus-python
desktop-file-utils 0.10-7 ia64 x86_64 desktop-file-utils
device-mapper 1.02.20-1.el5 ia64 i386 device-mapper
device-mapper#2 1.02.20-1.el5 - x86_64 device-mapper
device-mapper-multipath 0.4.7-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 device-mapper-multipath
dhcdbd 2.2-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 dhcdbd
dhclient 3.0.5-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 dhcp
dhcpv6_client 0.10-33.el5 ia64 x86_64 dhcpv6
diffutils 2.8.1-15.2.2 ia64 x86_64 diffutils
dmidecode 2.7-1.28.2.el5 - x86_64 dmidecode
dmraid 1.0.0.rc13-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 dmraid
dos2unix 3.1-27.1 ia64 x86_64 dos2unix
dosfstools 2.11-6.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 dosfstools
dump 0.4b41-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 dump
e2fsprogs 1.39-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 e2fsprogs
e2fsprogs-devel 1.39-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 e2fsprogs
e2fsprogs-libs 1.39-10.el5 ia64 i386 e2fsprogs
e2fsprogs-libs#2 1.39-10.el5 - x86_64 e2fsprogs
ed 0.2-38.2.2 ia64 x86_64 ed
eject 2.1.5-4.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 eject
elfutils 0.125-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 elfutils
elfutils-libelf 0.125-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 elfutils
elfutils-libs 0.125-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 elfutils
elilo 3.6-3 ia64 - elilo
elinks 0.11.1-5.1.0.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 elinks
ethtool 5-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 ethtool
expat 1.95.8-8.2.1 ia64 i386 expat
expat#2 1.95.8-8.2.1 - x86_64 expat
expect 5.43.0-5.1 ia64 i386 expect
expect#2 5.43.0-5.1 - x86_64 expect
expect-devel 5.43.0-5.1 ia64 i386 expect
expect-devel#2 5.43.0-5.1 - x86_64 expect
fbset 2.1-22 ia64 x86_64 fbset
file 4.17-9.0.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 file
filesystem 2.4.0-1 ia64 x86_64 filesystem
findutils 4.2.27-4.1 ia64 x86_64 findutils
finger 0.17-32.2.1.1 ia64 x86_64 finger
firstboot-tui 1.4.27.3-1.el5 noarch noarch firstboot
flex 2.5.4a-41.fc6 ia64 x86_64 flex
fontconfig 2.4.1-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 fontconfig
freetype 2.2.1-19.el5 ia64 x86_64 freetype
ftp 0.17-33.fc6 ia64 x86_64 ftp
gawk 3.1.5-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gawk
gcc 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gcc
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 13 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
gcc-c++ 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gcc
gdbm 1.8.0-26.2.1 ia64 x86_64 gdbm
gettext 0.14.6-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 gettext
ghostscript 8.15.2-9.1.el5 ia64 i386 ghostscript
ghostscript#2 8.15.2-9.1.el5 - x86_64 ghostscript
glib2 2.12.3-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 glib2
glib2-devel 2.12.3-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 glib2
glibc 2.5-18 ia64 i686 glibc
glibc#2 2.5-18 - x86_64 glibc
glibc-common 2.5-18 ia64 x86_64 glibc
glibc-devel 2.5-18 ia64 i386 glibc
glibc-devel#2 2.5-18 - x86_64 glibc
glibc-headers 2.5-18 ia64 x86_64 glibc
gnu-efi 3.0c-1.1 ia64 - gnu-efi
gnupg 1.4.5-13 ia64 x86_64 gnupg
gnutls 1.4.1-2 ia64 i386 gnutls
gnutls#2 1.4.1-2 - x86_64 gnutls
gpg-pubkey 37017186-45761324 (none) (none) (none)
gpm 1.20.1-74.1 ia64 i386 gpm
gpm#2 1.20.1-74.1 - x86_64 gpm
grep 2.5.1-54.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 grep
groff 1.18.1.1-11.1 ia64 x86_64 groff
grub 0.97-13 - x86_64 grub
gtk2 2.10.4-19.el5 ia64 x86_64 gtk2
gzip 1.3.5-9.el5 ia64 x86_64 gzip
hal 0.5.8.1-25.el5 ia64 x86_64 hal
hdparm 6.6-2 ia64 x86_64 hdparm
hesiod 3.1.0-8 ia64 x86_64 hesiod
htmlview 4.0.0-1.el5 noarch noarch htmlview
hwdata 0.211-1 noarch noarch hwdata
ifd-egate 0.05-15 ia64 x86_64 ifd-egate
imake 1.0.2-3 ia64 x86_64 imake
info 4.8-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 texinfo
initscripts 8.45.17.EL-1 ia64 x86_64 initscripts
iproute 2.6.18-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 iproute
ipsec-tools 0.6.5-8.el5 ia64 x86_64 ipsec-tools
iptables 1.3.5-1.2.1 ia64 x86_64 iptables
iptables-ipv6 1.3.5-1.2.1 ia64 x86_64 iptables
iptstate 1.4-1.1.2.2 ia64 x86_64 iptstate
iputils 20020927-43.el5 ia64 x86_64 iputils
irda-utils 0.9.17-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 irda-utils
irqbalance 0.55-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 irqbalance
jwhois 3.2.3-8.el5 ia64 x86_64 jwhois
kbd 1.12-19.el5 ia64 x86_64 kbd
kernel 2.6.18-53.1.13.el5 ia64 x86_64 kernel
kernel-devel 2.6.18-53.1.13.el5 ia64 x86_64 kernel
kernel-headers 2.6.18-53.el5 ia64 x86_64 kernel
keyutils-libs 1.2-1.el5 ia64 i386 keyutils
keyutils-libs#2 1.2-1.el5 - x86_64 keyutils
keyutils-libs-devel 1.2-1.el5 ia64 i386 keyutils
keyutils-libs-devel#2 1.2-1.el5 - x86_64 keyutils
kpartx 0.4.7-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 device-mapper-multipath
krb5-devel 1.6.1-17.el5 ia64 x86_64 krb5
krb5-libs 1.6.1-17.el5 ia64 i386 krb5
krb5-libs#2 1.6.1-17.el5 - x86_64 krb5
krb5-workstation 1.6.1-17.el5 ia64 x86_64 krb5
ksh 20060214-1.4 ia64 x86_64 ksh
kudzu 1.2.57.1.15-1 ia64 x86_64 kudzu
less 394-5.el5 ia64 x86_64 less
lftp 3.5.1-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 lftp
libFS 1.0.0-3.1 ia64 x86_64 libFS
libICE 1.0.1-2.1 ia64 i386 libICE
libICE#2 1.0.1-2.1 - x86_64 libICE
libIDL 0.8.7-1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 libIDL
libSM 1.0.1-3.1 ia64 i386 libSM
libSM#2 1.0.1-3.1 - x86_64 libSM
libX11 1.0.3-8.0.1.el5 ia64 i386 libX11
libX11#2 1.0.3-8.0.1.el5 - x86_64 libX11
libXau 1.0.1-3.1 ia64 i386 libXau
libXau#2 1.0.1-3.1 - x86_64 libXau
libXcursor 1.1.7-1.1 ia64 x86_64 libXcursor
libXdmcp 1.0.1-2.1 ia64 i386 libXdmcp
libXdmcp#2 1.0.1-2.1 - x86_64 libXdmcp
libXext 1.0.1-2.1 ia64 i386 libXext
libXext#2 1.0.1-2.1 - x86_64 libXext
libXfixes 4.0.1-2.1 ia64 x86_64 libXfixes
libXfont 1.2.2-1.0.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 libXfont
libXft 2.1.10-1.1 ia64 x86_64 libXft
libXi 1.0.1-3.1 ia64 i386 libXi
libXi#2 1.0.1-3.1 - x86_64 libXi
libXinerama 1.0.1-2.1 ia64 x86_64 libXinerama
libXrandr 1.1.1-3.1 ia64 x86_64 libXrandr
libXrender 0.9.1-3.1 ia64 x86_64 libXrender
Page 14 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
libXres 1.0.1-3.1 ia64 x86_64 libXres
libXt 1.0.2-3.1.fc6 ia64 i386 libXt
libXt#2 1.0.2-3.1.fc6 - x86_64 libXt
libXxf86vm 1.0.1-3.1 ia64 i386 libXxf86vm
libXxf86vm#2 1.0.1-3.1 - x86_64 libXxf86vm
libacl 2.2.39-2.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 acl
libaio 0.3.106-3.2 ia64 i386 libaio
libaio#2 0.3.106-3.2 - x86_64 libaio
libattr 2.4.32-1.1 ia64 i386 attr
libattr#2 2.4.32-1.1 - x86_64 attr
libattr-devel 2.4.32-1.1 ia64 i386 attr
libattr-devel#2 2.4.32-1.1 - x86_64 attr
libcap 1.10-26 ia64 i386 libcap
libcap#2 1.10-26 - x86_64 libcap
libcap-devel 1.10-26 ia64 i386 libcap
libcap-devel#2 1.10-26 - x86_64 libcap
libdrm 2.0.2-1.1 ia64 i386 libdrm
libdrm#2 2.0.2-1.1 - x86_64 libdrm
libevent 1.1a-3.2.1 ia64 x86_64 libevent
libfontenc 1.0.2-2.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 libfontenc
libgcc 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 i386 gcc
libgcc#2 4.1.2-14.el5 - x86_64 gcc
libgcrypt 1.2.3-1 ia64 i386 libgcrypt
libgcrypt#2 1.2.3-1 - x86_64 libgcrypt
libgomp 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gcc
libgpg-error 1.4-2 ia64 i386 libgpg-error
libgpg-error#2 1.4-2 - x86_64 libgpg-error
libgssapi 0.10-2 ia64 x86_64 libgssapi
libhugetlbfs 1.0.1-1.el5 - x86_64 libhugetlbfs
libhugetlbfs-lib 1.0.1-1.el5 - x86_64 libhugetlbfs
libidn 0.6.5-1.1 ia64 x86_64 libidn
libjpeg 6b-37 ia64 i386 libjpeg
libjpeg#2 6b-37 - x86_64 libjpeg
libnl 1.0-0.10.pre5.4 ia64 x86_64 libnl
libnotify 0.4.2-6.el5 ia64 x86_64 libnotify
libpcap 0.9.4-11.el5 ia64 x86_64 tcpdump
libpng 1.2.10-7.0.2 ia64 i386 libpng
libpng#2 1.2.10-7.0.2 - x86_64 libpng
libselinux 1.33.4-4.el5 ia64 i386 libselinux
libselinux#2 1.33.4-4.el5 - x86_64 libselinux
libselinux-devel 1.33.4-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 libselinux
libselinux-python 1.33.4-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 libselinux
libsemanage 1.9.1-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 libsemanage
libsemanage-devel 1.9.1-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 libsemanage
libsepol 1.15.2-1.el5 ia64 i386 libsepol
libsepol#2 1.15.2-1.el5 - x86_64 libsepol
libsepol-devel 1.15.2-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 libsepol
libstdc++ 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 i386 gcc
libstdc++#2 4.1.2-14.el5 - x86_64 gcc
libstdc++-devel 4.1.2-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 gcc
libsysfs 2.0.0-6 ia64 x86_64 sysfsutils
libtermcap 2.0.8-46.1 ia64 i386 libtermcap
libtermcap#2 2.0.8-46.1 - x86_64 libtermcap
libtermcap-devel 2.0.8-46.1 ia64 x86_64 libtermcap
libtiff 3.8.2-7.el5 ia64 i386 libtiff
libtiff#2 3.8.2-7.el5 - x86_64 libtiff
libusb 0.1.12-5.1 ia64 x86_64 libusb
libuser 0.54.7-2.el5.2 ia64 x86_64 libuser
libuser-devel 0.54.7-2.el5.2 ia64 x86_64 libuser
libutempter 1.1.4-3.fc6 ia64 i386 libutempter
libutempter#2 1.1.4-3.fc6 - x86_64 libutempter
libvolume_id 095-14.9.el5 ia64 x86_64 udev
libwnck 2.16.0-4.fc6 ia64 x86_64 libwnck
libxml2 2.6.26-2.1.2 ia64 x86_64 libxml2
libxml2-python 2.6.26-2.1.2 ia64 x86_64 libxml2
logrotate 3.7.4-7 ia64 x86_64 logrotate
logwatch 7.3-5 noarch noarch logwatch
lsof 4.78-3 ia64 x86_64 lsof
lspp-eal4-config-sgi 0.66-0.2 noarch noarch lspp-eal4-config-sgi
lvm2 2.02.26-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 lvm2
m2crypto 0.16-6.el5.1 ia64 x86_64 m2crypto
m4 1.4.5-3.el5.1 ia64 x86_64 m4
mailcap 2.1.23-1.fc6 noarch noarch mailcap
mailx 8.1.1-44.2.2 ia64 x86_64 mailx
make 3.81-1.1 ia64 x86_64 make
man 1.6d-1.1 ia64 x86_64 man
man-pages 2.39-10.el5 noarch noarch man-pages
mcelog 0.7-1.22.fc6 - x86_64 mcelog
mcstrans 0.2.6-1.el5_1.1 ia64 x86_64 mcstrans
mdadm 2.5.4-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 mdadm
mesa-libGL 6.5.1-7.5.el5 ia64 i386 mesa
mesa-libGL#2 6.5.1-7.5.el5 - x86_64 mesa
mgetty 1.1.33-9.fc6 ia64 x86_64 mgetty
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 15 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
microcode_ctl 1.17-1.42.el5 - x86_64 microcode_ctl
mingetty 1.07-5.2.2 ia64 x86_64 mingetty
mkbootdisk 1.5.3-2.1 - x86_64 mkbootdisk
mkinitrd 5.1.19.6-19 ia64 i386 mkinitrd
mkinitrd#2 5.1.19.6-19 - x86_64 mkinitrd
mktemp 1.5-23.2.2 ia64 x86_64 mktemp
mlocate 0.15-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 mlocate
module-init-tools 3.3-0.pre3.1.34.el5 ia64 x86_64 module-init-tools
mozldap 6.0.4-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 mozldap
mtools 3.9.10-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 mtools
mtr 0.71-3.1 ia64 x86_64 mtr
nano 1.3.12-1.1 ia64 x86_64 nano
nash 5.1.19.6-19 ia64 x86_64 mkinitrd
nc 1.84-10.fc6 ia64 x86_64 nc
ncurses 5.5-24.20060715 ia64 i386 ncurses
ncurses#2 5.5-24.20060715 - x86_64 ncurses
net-snmp-libs 5.3.1-19.el5 ia64 x86_64 net-snmp
net-tools 1.60-73 ia64 x86_64 net-tools
netlabel_tools 0.17-9.el5 ia64 x86_64 netlabel_tools
newt 0.52.2-9 ia64 x86_64 newt
nfs-utils 1.0.9-24.el5 ia64 x86_64 nfs-utils
nfs-utils-lib 1.0.8-7.2.z2 ia64 x86_64 nfs-utils-lib
notification-daemon 0.3.5-8.el5 ia64 x86_64 notification-daemon
nscd 2.5-18 ia64 x86_64 glibc
nspr 4.6.5-3.el5 ia64 i386 nspr
nspr#2 4.6.5-3.el5 - x86_64 nspr
nss 3.11.7-1.3.el5 ia64 i386 nss
nss#2 3.11.7-1.3.el5 - x86_64 nss
nss-tools 3.11.7-1.3.el5 ia64 x86_64 nss
nss_db 2.2-35.1 ia64 i386 nss_db
nss_db#2 2.2-35.1 - x86_64 nss_db
nss_ldap 253-5.el5 ia64 i386 nss_ldap
nss_ldap#2 253-5.el5 - x86_64 nss_ldap
ntsysv 1.3.30.1-1 ia64 x86_64 chkconfig
numactl 0.9.8-2.el5 ia64 i386 numactl
numactl#2 0.9.8-2.el5 - x86_64 numactl
openldap 2.3.27-8 ia64 i386 openldap
openldap#2 2.3.27-8 - x86_64 openldap
openssh 4.3p2-24.el5 ia64 x86_64 openssh
openssh-clients 4.3p2-24.el5 ia64 x86_64 openssh
openssh-server 4.3p2-24.el5 ia64 x86_64 openssh
openssl 0.9.8b-8.3.el5_0.2 ia64 i686 openssl
openssl#2 0.9.8b-8.3.el5_0.2 - x86_64 openssl
openssl-devel 0.9.8b-8.3.el5_0.2 ia64 x86_64 openssl
pam 0.99.6.2-3.26.el5 ia64 i386 pam
pam#2 0.99.6.2-3.26.el5 - x86_64 pam
pam-devel 0.99.6.2-3.26.el5 ia64 x86_64 pam
pam_ccreds 3-5 ia64 i386 pam_ccreds
pam_ccreds#2 3-5 - x86_64 pam_ccreds
pam_krb5 2.2.14-1 ia64 i386 pam_krb5
pam_krb5#2 2.2.14-1 - x86_64 pam_krb5
pam_passwdqc 1.0.2-1.2.2 ia64 i386 pam_passwdqc
pam_passwdqc#2 1.0.2-1.2.2 - x86_64 pam_passwdqc
pam_pkcs11 0.5.3-23 ia64 i386 pam_pkcs11
pam_pkcs11#2 0.5.3-23 - x86_64 pam_pkcs11
pam_smb 1.1.7-7.2.1 ia64 i386 pam_smb
pam_smb#2 1.1.7-7.2.1 - x86_64 pam_smb
pango 1.14.9-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 pango
paps 0.6.6-17.el5 ia64 x86_64 paps
parted 1.8.1-12.el5 ia64 i386 parted
parted#2 1.8.1-12.el5 - x86_64 parted
passwd 0.73-1 ia64 x86_64 passwd
patch 2.5.4-29.2.2 ia64 x86_64 patch
pax 3.4-1.2.2 ia64 x86_64 pax
pciutils 2.2.3-4 ia64 x86_64 pciutils
pciutils-devel 2.2.3-4 ia64 i386 pciutils
pciutils-devel#2 2.2.3-4 - x86_64 pciutils
pcmciautils 014-5 ia64 x86_64 pcmciautils
pcre 6.6-1.1 ia64 x86_64 pcre
pcsc-lite 1.3.1-7 ia64 x86_64 pcsc-lite
pcsc-lite-libs 1.3.1-7 ia64 x86_64 pcsc-lite
perl 5.8.8-10 ia64 x86_64 perl
perl-Digest-HMAC 1.01-15 noarch noarch perl-Digest-HMAC
perl-Digest-SHA1 2.11-1.2.1 ia64 x86_64 perl-Digest-SHA1
perl-String-CRC32 1.4-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 perl-String-CRC32
pinfo 0.6.9-1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 pinfo
pkgconfig 0.21-1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 pkgconfig
pkinit-nss 0.7.3-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 pkinit-nss
pm-utils 0.99.3-6.el5.17 ia64 x86_64 pm-utils
policycoreutils 1.33.12-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 policycoreutils
policycoreutils-newrole 1.33.12-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 policycoreutils
popt 1.10.2-47.el5 ia64 x86_64 rpm
portmap 4.0-65.2.2.1 ia64 x86_64 portmap
Page 16 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
postfix 2.3.3-2 ia64 x86_64 postfix
ppp 2.4.4-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 ppp
prctl 1.4-5.2.1 ia64 - prctl
prelink 0.3.9-2.1 - x86_64 prelink
procps 3.2.7-8.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 procps
psacct 6.3.2-41.1 ia64 x86_64 psacct
psmisc 22.2-5 ia64 x86_64 psmisc
pyOpenSSL 0.6-1.p24.7.2.2 ia64 x86_64 pyOpenSSL
pygobject2 2.12.1-5.el5 ia64 x86_64 pygobject2
python 2.4.3-19.el5 ia64 x86_64 python
python-devel 2.4.3-19.el5 ia64 i386 python
python-devel#2 2.4.3-19.el5 - x86_64 python
python-elementtree 1.2.6-5 ia64 x86_64 python-elementtree
python-sqlite 1.1.7-1.2.1 ia64 x86_64 python-sqlite
python-urlgrabber 3.1.0-2 noarch noarch python-urlgrabber
quota 3.13-1.2.3.2.el5 ia64 x86_64 quota
rdate 1.4-6 ia64 x86_64 rdate
rdist 6.1.5-44 ia64 x86_64 rdist
readahead 1.3-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 readahead
readline 5.1-1.1 ia64 i386 readline
readline#2 5.1-1.1 - x86_64 readline
readline-devel 5.1-1.1 ia64 i386 readline
readline-devel#2 5.1-1.1 - x86_64 readline
redhat-logos 4.9.16-1 noarch noarch redhat-logos
redhat-lsb 3.1-12.3.EL ia64 i386 redhat-lsb
redhat-lsb#2 3.1-12.3.EL - x86_64 redhat-lsb
redhat-menus 6.7.8-2.el5 noarch noarch redhat-menus
redhat-release 5Server-5.1.0.2 ia64 x86_64 redhat-release
redhat-release-notes 5Server-9 ia64 x86_64 redhat-release-notes
rhel-instnum 1.0.7-1.el5 noarch noarch rhel-instnum
rhn-check 0.4.16-1.el5 noarch noarch rhn-client-tools
rhn-client-tools 0.4.16-1.el5 noarch noarch rhn-client-tools
rhn-setup 0.4.16-1.el5 noarch noarch rhn-client-tools
rhnlib 2.2.5-1.el5 noarch noarch rhnlib
rhnsd 4.6.1-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 rhnsd
rhpl 0.194.1-1 ia64 x86_64 rhpl
rmt 0.4b41-2.fc6 ia64 x86_64 dump
rng-utils 2.0-1.14.1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 rng-utils
rootfiles 8.1-1.1.1 noarch noarch rootfiles
rp-pppoe 3.5-32.1 ia64 x86_64 rp-pppoe
rpm 4.4.2-47.el5 ia64 x86_64 rpm
rpm-build 4.4.2-47.el5 ia64 x86_64 rpm
rpm-libs 4.4.2-47.el5 ia64 x86_64 rpm
rpm-python 4.4.2-47.el5 ia64 x86_64 rpm
rsh 0.17-37.el5 ia64 x86_64 rsh
rsync 2.6.8-3.1 ia64 x86_64 rsync
salinfo 1.1-3.el5 ia64 - salinfo
sed 4.1.5-5.fc6 ia64 x86_64 sed
selinux-policy 2.4.6-106.el5_1.3 noarch noarch selinux-policy
selinux-policy-devel 2.4.6-106.el5_1.3 noarch noarch selinux-policy
selinux-policy-mls 2.4.6-106.el5_1.3 noarch noarch selinux-policy
selinux-policy-strict 2.4.6-106.el5_1.3 noarch noarch selinux-policy
selinux-policy-targeted 2.4.6-106.el5_1.3 noarch noarch selinux-policy
setarch 2.0-1.1 ia64 x86_64 setarch
setools 3.0-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 setools
setserial 2.17-19.2.2 ia64 x86_64 setserial
setup 2.5.58-1.el5 noarch noarch setup
setuptool 1.19.2-1 ia64 x86_64 setuptool
shadow-utils 4.0.17-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 shadow-utils
slang 2.0.6-4.el5 ia64 x86_64 slang
smartmontools 5.36-3.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 smartmontools
sos 1.7-9.1.el5 noarch noarch sos
specspo 13-1.el5 noarch noarch specspo
sqlite 3.3.6-2 ia64 x86_64 sqlite
star 1.5a75-2 ia64 x86_64 star
startup-notification 0.8-4.1 ia64 x86_64 startup-notification
strace 4.5.16-1.el5.1 ia64 x86_64 strace
stunnel 4.15-2 ia64 x86_64 stunnel
sudo 1.6.8p12-10 ia64 x86_64 sudo
svrcore 4.0.4-3.el5 ia64 i386 svrcore
svrcore#2 4.0.4-3.el5 - x86_64 svrcore
swig 1.3.29-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 swig
symlinks 1.2-24.2.2 ia64 x86_64 symlinks
sysfsutils 2.0.0-6 ia64 x86_64 sysfsutils
sysklogd 1.4.1-40.el5 ia64 x86_64 sysklogd
syslinux 3.11-4 - x86_64 syslinux
system-config-network-tui 1.3.99-2.el5 noarch noarch system-config-network
system-config-securitylevel-tui 1.6.29.1-1.el5 ia64 x86_64 system-config-securitylevel
talk 0.17-29.2.2 ia64 x86_64 talk
tar 1.15.1-23.0.1.el5 ia64 x86_64 tar
tcl 8.4.13-3.fc6 ia64 i386 tcl
tcl#2 8.4.13-3.fc6 - x86_64 tcl
tcp_wrappers 7.6-40.4.el5 ia64 i386 tcp_wrappers
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 17 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
tcp_wrappers#2 7.6-40.4.el5 - x86_64 tcp_wrappers
tcpdump 3.9.4-11.el5 ia64 x86_64 tcpdump
tcsh 6.14-12.el5 ia64 x86_64 tcsh
telnet 0.17-38.el5 ia64 x86_64 telnet
termcap 5.5-1.20060701.1 noarch noarch termcap
texinfo 4.8-14.el5 ia64 x86_64 texinfo
time 1.7-27.2.2 ia64 x86_64 time
tk 8.4.13-3.fc6 ia64 i386 tk
tk#2 8.4.13-3.fc6 - x86_64 tk
tmpwatch 2.9.7-1.1.el5.1 ia64 x86_64 tmpwatch
traceroute 2.0.1-2.el5 ia64 x86_64 traceroute
tree 1.5.0-4 ia64 x86_64 tree
ttmkfdir 3.0.9-23.el5 ia64 x86_64 ttmkfdir
tzdata 2007d-1.el5 noarch noarch tzdata
udev 095-14.9.el5 ia64 x86_64 udev
unix2dos 2.2-26.2.2 ia64 x86_64 unix2dos
unzip 5.52-2.2.1 ia64 x86_64 unzip
urw-fonts 2.3-6.1.1 noarch noarch urw-fonts
usbutils 0.71-2.1 ia64 x86_64 usbutils
usermode 1.88-3.el5 ia64 x86_64 usermode
util-linux 2.13-0.45.el5 ia64 x86_64 util-linux
vconfig 1.9-2.1 ia64 x86_64 vconfig
vim-minimal 7.0.109-3.el5.3 ia64 x86_64 vim
vixie-cron 4.1-72.el5 ia64 x86_64 vixie-cron
vsftpd 2.0.5-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 vsftpd
wget 1.10.2-7.el5 ia64 x86_64 wget
which 2.16-7 ia64 x86_64 which
wireless-tools 28-2.el5 ia64 i386 wireless-tools
wireless-tools#2 28-2.el5 - x86_64 wireless-tools
words 3.0-9 noarch noarch words
wpa_supplicant 0.4.8-10.1.fc6 ia64 x86_64 wpa_supplicant
xinetd 2.3.14-10.el5 ia64 x86_64 xinetd
xorg-x11-filesystem 7.1-2.fc6 noarch noarch xorg-x11-filesystem
xorg-x11-font-utils 7.1-2 ia64 x86_64 xorg-x11-font-utils
xorg-x11-xfs 1.0.2-4 ia64 x86_64 xorg-x11-xfs
yp-tools 2.9-0.1 ia64 x86_64 yp-tools
ypbind 1.19-8.el5 ia64 x86_64 ypbind
yum 3.0.1-5.el5 noarch noarch yum
yum-metadata-parser 1.0-8.fc6 ia64 x86_64 yum-metadata-parser
yum-rhn-plugin 0.5.2-3.el5 noarch noarch yum-rhn-plugin
yum-security 1.0.4-3.el5 noarch noarch yum-utils
yum-updatesd 3.0.1-5.el5 noarch noarch yum
zip 2.31-1.2.2 ia64 x86_64 zip
zlib 1.2.3-3 ia64 i386 zlib
zlib#2 1.2.3-3 - x86_64 zlib
zlib-devel 1.2.3-3 ia64 i386 zlib
zlib-devel#2 1.2.3-3 - x86_64 zlib
1.5.2 Configurations
The evaluated configurations are defined as follows.
 The CC evaluated package set must be selected at install time in accordance with the description provided
in the Evaluated Configuration Guide and installed accordingly.
 Red Hat Enterprise Linux supports the use of IPv4 and IPv6, both are also supported in the evaluated
configuration.
 Both installation from CD and installation from a defined disk partition are supported.
 The default configuration for identification and authentication are the defined password based PAM
modules. Support for other authentication options e.g. smartcard authentication, is not included in the
evaluation configuration.
 If the system console is used, it must be connected directly to the TOE and afforded the same physical
protection as the TOE.
 The TOE supports two modes of operation: CAPP-mode and LSPP-mode. The software configuration for
both modes is identical and the only difference is within the SELinux security module and the policy file
for this module.
The TOE comprises a single server machine (and optional peripherals) as listed in section 1.5.2.2 of this document
running the system software listed in the package list in section 1.5.1 of this document (a server running the above
listed software is referred to as a “TOE server” below).
Page 18 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
1.5.2.1 File systems
The following file system types are supported:
 the ext3 journaling filesystem,
 the read-only ISO 9660 filesystem for CD-ROM drives and DVD drives,
 The process file system, procfs (/proc) represents processes / tasks as files and directories containing live
status information for each process in the system. Process access decisions are enforced by DAC attributes
inferred from the underlying process’ DAC attributes. Additional restrictions apply for specific objects in
this file system.
 The sysfs filesystem (sysfs) used to export and handle non-process related kernel information such as
device driver specific information. Access to objects there can be restricted using the DAC mechanism
(which consists of the permission bits only).
 The temporary filesystem (tmpfs) used as a fast nonpersistent RAM based file system.
 The pseudoterminal device file system (devpts) used to provide pseudo terminal support.
 The virtual root file system (rootfs) used temporarily during system startup.
 The miscellaneous binary file format registration file system (binfmt_misc) used to configure interpreters
for executing binary files based on file header information.
 The Security Enhanced Linux file system (selinuxfs) provides the SELinux policy API for userspace
programs and is used for configuring the selinux system.
1.5.2.2 TOE Hardware
The hardware on which the software components of the TOE are executed is considered part of the TOE.
The TOE consists of the TOE software running on one of the following systems:
 SGI Altix XE servers (200 and 300 series, Xeon EM64T/x86_64 based). Examples are the Altix XE250 and
Altix XE320.
 SGI Altix 400 and 4000 series (Itanium2/ia64-based) consisting of a customer selected combination of the
following blade types:
 Compute/Memory blade
 Memory-only blade
 Base I/O Blade
 PCI-X expansion blade
 PCI-Express expansion blade
RASC blades are not supported in the evaluated configuration.
Examples of Altix 400 and 4000 series servers are the ALTIX 450 and A4700.
The hardware partition facility of Altix is not supported in the evaluated configuration and must not be used.
The following picture illustrates the use of different blade types within a server:
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 19 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The following peripherals can be used with the TOE preserving the security functionality:
§ all terminals supported by the TOE software (except hot pluggable devices connected via USB or IEEE
1394 (Firewire) interfaces).
§ printers compatible with PostScript level 1 or PCL 4 attached via parallel port or USB. Network printers are
supported in CAPP mode only.
§ all storage devices and backup devices supported by the TOE software (hard disks, CDROM drives,
streamer drives, floppy disk drives) (except hot pluggable devices connected via USB or IEEE 1394
(Firewire) interfaces).
§ all Ethernet and Token-Ring network adapters supported by the TOE software.
Note: peripheral devices are part of the TOE environment.
Note: the peripherals are physical peripherals, logical partitions or virtualization are not supported..
Note: Excluding hot pluggable devices connected via USB does not exclude all USB devices. USB printers,
keyboards and mice may be attached provided they are connected before booting the operating system.
1.5.2.3 TOE Environment
Several TOE systems may be interlinked in a network, and individual networks may be joined by bridges and/or
routers, or by TOE systems which act as routers and/or gateways. Each of the TOE systems implements its own
security policy. The TOE does not include any synchronization function for those policies. As a result a single user
may have user accounts on each of those systems with different user IDs, different roles, and other different attributes.
(A synchronization method may optionally be used, but it not part of the TOE and must not use methods that conflict
with the TOE requirements.)
If other systems are connected to a network they need to be configured and managed by the same authority using an
appropriate security policy that does not conflict with the security policy of the TOE. All links between this network
and untrusted networks (e. g. the Internet) need to be protected by appropriate measures such as carefully configured
firewall systems that prohibit attacks from the untrusted networks. Those protections are part of the TOE environment.
Page 20 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
2 Conformance Claims
2.1 Common Criteria
The ST is [CC] Part 2 extended and Part 3 conformant.
The extensions to part 2 of the Common Criteria are those introduced by the Controlled Access Protection Profile
[CAPP] (which are also included in the Labeled Securtity Protection Profile [LSPP]).
2.2 Packages
The ST claims an Evaluation Assurance Level of EAL4 augmented by ALC_FLR.3.
2.3 Protection Profiles
This Security Target claims demonstratable conformance with the “Controlled Access Protection Profile" [CAPP].
This Protection Profile is listed on the TPEP web site of NSA as a “Certified Protection Profile”, and was also used as
the basis of the evaluation of AIX 5.2, Sun Solaris 8 and HP-UX 11.11.
This Security Target also claims demonstratable conformance with the „Labeled Security Protection Profile" [LSPP]
when the TOE is operated in LSPP mode. This Protection Profile is also listed on the TPEP web site of NSA as a
“Certified Protection Profile”.
This Security Target also claims demonstratable conformance with the “Role-Based Access Control Protection
Profile” [RBACPP] when the TOE is operated in LSPP mode. This Protection Profile is not listed as a certified
protection profile. Where appropriate and possible the author of this Security Target has combined multiply defined
security functional requirements, assumptions, threats, and organisational security policies included in [LSPP] and
[RBACPP] into single instantiations. In cases where this was not possible, the author included multiple instantiations
to achieve compatibility with both [LSPP] and [RBACPP].
2.3.1 PP Tailoring
One additional security functional requirement (FMT_SMF.1) has been added to those defined in the protection
profiles. The reason is that [CC] defines the new family FMT_SMF and adds dependencies from FMT_MSA.1 and
FMT_MTD.1 to the new component FMT_SMF.1. To resolve those new dependencies, FMT_SMF.1 has been added
as a security functional requirement in addition to those defined in the protection profiles.
The requirements FCS_CKM.1, FCS_CKM.2, FCS_COP.1, FDP_UCT.1, FDP_UIT.1, FMT_MSA.2, and FTP_ITC.1
represent TOE specific extensions to the requirements defined by [CAPP], [LSPP], and [RBACPP].
All other security functional requirements in this ST are inherited from the protection profiles and the operations
allowed / required by the PP are performed and indicated in bold letters. Two security functional components
(FIA_UAU.1 and FIA_UID.1) have been replaced by hierarchical higher ones (FIA_UAU.2 and FIA_UID.2). In
both cases the only difference is the fact that no interaction with the TOE is allowed without proper user identification
and authentication. This does not modify any of the rationale provided in the PP. The same assessment applies to the
use of the hierarchical SFR FMT_SMR.2 as a replacement for FMT_SMR.1.
Security Functional Requirements have been refined where required by the Protection Profiles.
Assumptions, organisational security policies and threats from [CAPP], [LSPP], and [RBACPP] were partially
merged where they overlapped. Additional threats have been added for the environment. Additional assumptions were
added due to additional objectives for the non-IT environment.
[RBACPP] defines T.OPERATE and T.ROLEDEV as threats to be addressed by the operating environment. This ST
defines these threats as being countered by the TOE.
One additional security objectives for the TOE (O.COMPROT) has been defined to reflect the ability of the TOE to
connect with trusted IT products via trusted channels. Objectives for the TOE environment have been added to this ST
in addition to the ones contained in the protection profiles to allow a more distinguished description of the TOE
environment - this does not impact the conformance of this ST to the PP.
The following security objectives for the TOE environment have been added:
OE.ADMIN OE.INFO_PROTECT
OE.MAINTENANCE OE.RECOVER
OE.SOFTWARE_IN OE.SERIAL_LOGIN
OE.PROTECT
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 21 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Those objectives are required to cover the specific threats addressing the TOE environment. All objectives are related
to physical and procedural security measures and therefore address the TOE non-IT environment.
The assurance requirements of the Protection Profile are those defined in the Evaluation Assurance Level EAL4 of the
Common Criteria. This Security Target specifies an Evaluation Assurance Level EAL.3 augmented by ALC_FLR.3.
Since the Evaluation Assurance Levels in the Common Criteria define a hierarchy, all assurance requirements of the
Protection Profile are included in this Security Target. ALC_FLR.3 which has been added to the assurance
requirements defined in [CAPP] and [LSPP] has no dependency on any other security functional requirement or
security assurance requirement and is therefore an augmentation that has no effect on the security functional
requirements or security assurance requirements stated in the Protection Profile.
Page 22 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
3 Security Problem Definition
3.1 Introduction
The statement of TOE security environment describes the security aspects of the environment in which the TOE is
intended to be used and the manner in which it is expected to be deployed.
To this end, the statement of TOE security environment identifies the list of assumptions made on the operational
environment (including physical and procedural measures) and the intended method of use of the product, defines the
threats that the product is designed to counter, and the organizational security policies with which the product is
designed to comply.
This Security Targets combines the threats, organizational policies and assumptions from [CAPP], [LSPP] and
[RBACPP]. Those mentioned in [LSPP] are a superset of the ones mentioned in [CAPP]. In many cases [LSPP] and
[RBACPP] have very similar threats, policies and assumptions, which the author of this Security Target has attempted
to combine in a useful way.
3.2 Threats
The assumed security threats are listed below.
The IT assets to be protected comprise the information stored, processed or transmitted by the TOE. The term
“information” is used here to refer to all data held within a server, including data in transit between systems.
The TOE counters the general threat of unauthorized access to information, where “access” includes disclosure,
modification and destruction.
The threat agents can be categorized as either:
 unauthorized users of the TOE, i.e. individuals who have not been granted the right to access the system; or
 authorized users of the TOE, i.e. individuals who have been granted the right to access the system.
The threat agents are assumed to originate from a well managed user community in a non-hostile working
environment, and hence the product protects against threats of security vulnerabilities that might be exploited in the
intended environment for the TOE with medium level of expertise and effort. The TOE protects against
straightforward or intentional breach of TOE security by attackers possessing a low attack potential.
The threats listed below are grouped according to whether or not they are countered by the TOE. Those that are not
countered by the TOE are countered by environmental or external mechanisms.
3.2.1 Threats countered by the TOE
T.UAUSER An attacker (possibly, but not necessarily, an unauthorized user of the TOE) may impersonate
an authorized user of the TOE. This includes the threat of an authorized user that tries to
impersonate as another authorized user without knowing the authentication information.
T.ACCESS A user may gain access to resources or perform operations for which no access rights have
been granted.
T.COMPROT An attacker (possibly, but not necessarily, an unauthorized user of the TOE) may intercept a
communication link between the TOE and another trusted IT product to read or modify
information transferred between the TOE and the other trusted IT product (which may be
another instantiation of the TOE) using defined protocols (SSH or SSL) in a way that can not
be detected by the TOE or the other trusted IT product.
T.OPERATE Compromise of the IT assets may occur because of improper administration and operation of
the TOE.
T.ROLEDEV The development and assignment of user roles may be done in a manner that undermines
security.
3.2.2 Threats to be countered by measures within the TOE environment
The following threats to the system need to be countered in the TOE environment:
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 23 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
TE.HWMF An attacker with legitimate physical access to the hardware of the TOE (examples are
maintenance personnel or legitimate users) or environmental conditions may cause a
hardware malfunction with the effect that a user (normal or administrative) is losing stored
data due to this hardware malfunction. An attacker may cause such a hardware malfunction
either by having physical access to the hardware the TOE is running on or by executing
software that capable of causing hardware malfunction. Note that such a hardware
malfunction may be caused accidently without malicious intent by persons having physical
access to the TOE.
TE.COR_FILE An attacker (including but not limited to an unauthorized user of the TOE) or environmental
conditions such as a hardware malfunction may intentionally or accidentally modify or
corrupt security enforcing or relevant files of the TOE without an administrative user being
able to detect this. An attacker may corrupt such files either by having physical access to the
TOE hardware, by booting other software than the TOE software in its evaluated
configuration, or by modifying or corrupting files on backup media. Note that such a
corruption may be caused accidently without malicious intent by persons having legitimate
access to media where such data is stored.
3.3 Organizational Security Policies
The TOE complies with the following organizational security policies:
P.ACCESS (LSPP mode only) Access rights to specific data objects are determined by the owner of the
object, the role of the subject attempting access, and the implicit and explicit access rights to
the object granted to the role by the object owner.
P.AUTHORIZED_USERS
Only those users who have been authorized to access the information within the system may
access the system.
P.NEED_TO_KNOW
The organization must define a discretionary access control policy on a need-to-know basis
which can be modeled based on:
a) the owner of the object; and
b) the identity of the subject attempting the access; and
c) the implicit and explicit access rights to the object granted to the subject by the object
owner or an administrative user or (in LSPP-mode) by the sensitivity label of the
subject and object.
Application Note: Being able to model an organization’s access control policy based on the
three properties above ensures that the organization’s policy can be mapped to the TOE
with the security functions provided by the TOE. For example an access control policy
based on time dependent or content dependent rules would not satisfy the above
mentioned policy.
P.ACCOUNTABILITY
The users of the system shall be held accountable for their actions within the system.
P.CLASSIFICATION
(LSPP mode only) The system must limit the access to information based on sensitivity, as
represented by a label, of the information contained in objects, and the formal clearance of
users, as represented by subjects, to access that information. The access rules enforced
prevent a subject from accessing information which is of higher sensitivity than it is operating
at and prevent a subject from causing information from being downgraded to a lower
sensitivity.
The method for classification of information is made based on criteria set forth by the
organization. This is usually done on a basis of relative value to the organization and its
interest to limit dissemination of that information. The determination of classification of
information is outside the scope of the IT system; the IT system is only expected to enforce
the classification rules, not determine classification.
The method for determining clearances is also outside the scope of the IT system. It is
essentially based on the trust placed in individual users by the organization. To some extent is
also dependent upon the individual’s role within the organization.
Page 24 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
3.4 Assumptions
This section indicates the minimum physical and procedural measures required to maintain security of the Red Hat
Enterprise Linux product. The assumptions have been derived from [CAPP]/[LSPP] and [RBACPP]. In some cases
those protection profiles have similar but not identical assumptions. Where possible this Security Target has combined
those in a way that addresses the assumptions of all those protection profiles.
3.4.1 Physical Aspects
A.ASSET It is also assumed that the value of the stored assets merits moderately intensive
penetration or masquerading attacks. It is also assumed that physical controls in place
would alert the system authorities to the physical presence of attackers within the
controlled space.
A.LOCATE The processing resources of the TOE will be located within controlled access facilities
which will prevent unauthorized physical access.
A.PROTECT The TOE hardware and software critical to security policy enforcement will be protected
from unauthorized physical modification including unauthorized modifications by
potentially hostile outsiders.
3.4.2 Personnel Aspects
A.ACCESS (LSPP mode only) Rights for users to gain access and perform operations on information
are based on their membership in one or more roles. These roles are granted to the users
by the TOE Administrator. These roles accurately reflect the users job function,
responsibilities, qualifications, and/or competencies within the enterprise.
A.MANAGE It is assumed that there are one or more competent individuals who are assigned to
manage the TOE and the security of the information it contains. These individuals will
have sole responsibility for the following functions: (a) create and maintain roles (b)
establish and maintain relationships among roles (c) Assignment and Revocation of users
to roles. In addition these individuals (as ‘owners of the entire corporate data’), along
with object owners will have the ability to assign and revoke object access rights to roles.
A.OWNER (LSPP mode only) A limited set of users is given the rights to “create new data objects”
and they become owners for those data objects. The organization is the owner of the rest
of the information under the control of TOE.
A.NO_EVIL_ADMIN The system administrative personnel are not careless, willfully negligent, or hostile, and
will follow and abide by the instructions provided by the administrator documentation.
A.COOP Authorized users possess the necessary authorization to access at least some of the
information managed by the TOE and are expected to act in a cooperating manner in a
benign environment.
A.UTRAIN Users are trained to use the security functionality provided by the system appropriately.
A.UTRUST Users are trusted to accomplish some task or group of tasks within a secure IT
environment by exercising complete control over their data.
3.4.3 Procedural Aspects (LSPP-mode only)
A.CLEARANCE Procedures exist for granting users authorization for access to specific security levels.
A.SENSITIVITY Procedures exist for establishing the security level of all information imported into the
system, for establishing the security level for all peripheral devices (e.g., printers, tape
drives, disk drives) attached to the TOE, and marking a sensitivity label on all output
generated.
3.4.4 Connectivity Aspects
A.NET_COMP All network components (such as bridges and routers) are assumed to correctly pass data
without modification.
A.PEER Any other systems with which the TOE communicates are assumed to be under the same
management control and operate under the same security policy constraints. When
operating in LSPP mode any data exported from the TOE to another system either with
its sensitivity label or without the sensitivity label (over a single level connection) is
assumed to be handled in accordance with its sensitivity label on any system that imports
this data.
A.CONNECT All connections to peripheral devices and all network connections not using the secured
protocols SSH v2.0 or SSL v3 reside within the controlled access facilities. When using
labeled networking in LSPP mode, all network connections need to reside within the
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 25 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
controlled access facilities because the secured protocols SSH and SSL do not protect the
label information. Internal communication paths to access points such as terminals or
other systems are assumed to be adequately protected.
Page 26 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
4 Security Objectives
4.1 Security Objectives for the TOE
The security objectives have been derived from [CAPP]/[LSPP] and [RBACPP]. Where the protection profiles define
similar but not identical security objectives this Security Target has attempted to combine them in a way that addresses
the details of the security objectives of all source protection profiles.
O.AUTHORIZATION The TOE must ensure that only authorized users gain access to the TOE and its resources.
O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS The TSF must control access to resources based on identity of users. The TSF
must allow authorized users to specify which resources may be accessed by which users.
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
(LSPP mode only) The TSF must control access to resources based upon the sensitivity
and categories of the information being accessed and the clearance of the subject
attempting to access that information.
O.AUDITING The TSF must record the security relevant actions of users of the TOE and security
relevant events. The TSF must present this information to authorized administrators. The
information recorded with security relevant events must be in sufficient detail to help an
administrator of the TOE detect attempted security violations or potential
misconfiguration of the TOE security features that would leave the IT assets open to
compromise.
O.RESIDUAL_INFO The TOE must ensure that any information contained in a protected resource is not
released when the resource is recycled.
O.MANAGE The TSF must provide all the functions and facilities necessary to support administrative
users that are responsible for the management of TOE security and must ensure that only
administrative users are able to access such functionality. Those functions must enable an
authorized administrator to effectively manage the TOE and its security functions.
O.ENFORCEMENT The TSF must be designed and implemented in a manner which ensures that the
organizational policies are enforced in the target environment. The TOE security policy is
enforced in a manner which ensures that the organizational policies are enforced in the
target environment i.e. the integrity of the TSF is protected.
O.COMPROT The TSF must be designed and implemented in a manner that allows for establishing a
trusted channel between the TOE and another trusted IT product that protects the user
data transferred over this channel from disclosure and undetected modification.
O.DUTY (LSPP mode only) The TOE must provide the capability of enforcing ‘separation of
duties’, so that no single user has to be granted the right to perform all operations on
important information.
O.HIERARCHICAL (LSPP mode only) The TOE must allow hierarchical definitions of roles. Hierarchical
definition of roles means the ability to define roles in terms of other roles. This saves time
and allows for more convenient administration of the TOE.
O.ROLE (LSPP mode only) The TOE must prevent users from gaining access to and performing
operations on its resources/objects unless they have been granted access by the
resource/object owner or they have been assigned to a role (by an authorized
administrator) which permits those operations.
4.2 Security Objectives for the TOE Environment
All security requirements listed in this section are targeted at the non-IT environment of the TOE.
OE.ADMIN Those responsible for the administration of the TOE are competent and trustworthy
individuals, capable of managing the TOE and the security of the information it contains.
OE.CREDEN Those responsible for the TOE must ensure that user authentication data is stored securely
and not disclosed to unauthorized individuals. In particular:
Procedures must be established to ensure that user passwords generated by an
administrator during user account creation or modification are distributed in a secure
manner, as appropriate for the purpose of the system.
The media on which authentication data is stored must not be physically removable from
the system by other than administrative users.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 27 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Users must not disclose their passwords to other individuals.
OE.INSTALL Those responsible for the TOE must establish and implement procedures to ensure that
the hardware, software and firmware components that comprise the system are
distributed, installed, configured and administered in a secure manner. This includes the
definition and assignment of roles.
OE.PHYSICAL Those responsible for the TOE must ensure that those parts of the TOE critical to security
policy are protected from physical attack which might compromise IT security
objectives.
OE.INFO_PROTECT Those responsible for the TOE must establish and implement procedures to ensure that
information is protected in an appropriate manner. In particular:
DAC and MAC protections on security critical files (such as configuration files and
authentication databases) shall always be set up correctly.
Network and peripheral cabling must be approved for the transmittal of the most sensitive
data held by the system. Such physical links are assumed to be adequately protected
against threats to the confidentiality and integrity of the data transmitted unless one of the
secure protocols provided by the TOE is used for the communication with another trusted
entity.
This requires that users are trained to perform those tasks properly and trustworthy to not
deliberately misuse their access to information and pass it on to somebody that does not
have the right to access the information.
OE.MAINTENANCE Administrative users of the TOE must ensure that any diagnostics facilities provided by
the product are invoked at every scheduled preventative maintenance period.
OE.RECOVER Those responsible for the TOE must ensure that procedures and/or mechanisms are
provided to assure that, after system failure or other discontinuity, recovery without a
protection (i.e., security) compromise is obtained.
OE.SOFTWARE_IN Those responsible for the TOE shall ensure that the system shall be configured so that
only an administrative user can introduce new trusted software into the system.
OE.SERIAL_LOGIN Those responsible for the TOE shall implement procedures to ensure that users clear the
screen before logging off where serial login devices are used.
The following security objective applies in environments where specific threats to networked systems need to be
countered. (Either physical protection measures or cryptographic controls may be applied to achieve this objective.
The TOE provides some security functions that can be used to protect communication links, but the TOE does not
enforce that those functions are used for all communication links. Communication links not protected by the functions
provided as part of the TOE or communication links that need protection against interruption of communication have
to be protected by security measures in the TOE environment.)
OE.PROTECT Those responsible for the TOE must ensure that procedures and/or mechanisms exist to
ensure that data transferred between servers is secured from disclosure and tampering
when using communication links that are not protected by the use of the SSL or SSH
protocols. (Note that interruption of communication is not prevented by the use of those
protocols. If protection against interruption of communication is required, adequate
protection in the TOE environment has to be established for all communication links.)
4.3 Security Objective Rationale
The following tables provide a mapping of security objectives to the environment defined by the threats, policies and
assumptions, illustrating that each security objective covers at least one threat, assumption or policy and that each
threat, assumption or policy is covered by at least one security objective.
4.3.1 Security Objectives Coverage
Table 4-1: Mapping Objectives to threats, assumptions and policies
Objective Threat / Policy
O.AUTHORIZATION T.UAUSER, P.AUTHORIZED_USERS
O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS T.ACCESS, P.NEED_TO_KNOW
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS P.CLASSIFICATION
O.RESIDUAL_INFO P.NEED_TO_KNOW, T.ACCESS
O.MANAGE P.AUTHORIZED_USERS, P.NEED_TO_KNOW,
T.UAUSER, T.OPERATE
O.ENFORCEMENT P.AUTHORIZED_USERS, P.NEED_TO_KNOW
Page 28 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
O.AUDITING P.ACCOUNTABILITY
O.COMPROT T.COMPROT, P.NEED_TO_KNOW
O.DUTY T.ROLEDEV
O.HIERARCHICAL T.ROLEDEV
O.ROLE T.ROLEDEV, P.ACCESS
Table 4-2: Mapping objectives for the environment to threats, assumptions and policies
Env. Objective Threat / Assumption / Policy
OE.ADMIN A.MANAGE, A.NO_EVIL_ADMIN
OE.CREDEN A.COOP
OE.INSTALL TE.COR_FILE, A.MANAGE, A.NO_EVIL_ADMIN,
A.PEER, A.NET_COMP
OE.PHYSICAL A.LOCATE, A.PROTECT, A.CONNECT
OE.INFO_PROTECT TE.COR_FILE, A.PROTECT, A.UTRAIN, A.UTRUST,
A.ASSET, A.ACCESS, A.OWNER, A.CLEARANCE,
A.SENSITIVITY
OE.MAINTENANCE TE.HWMF
OE.RECOVER A.MANAGE, TE.HWMF, TE.COR_FILE
OE.SOFTWARE_IN P.NEED_TO_KNOW
OE.SERIAL_LOGIN A.CONNECT
OE.PROTECT TE.COR_FILE, A.NET_COMP, A.CONNECT
4.3.2 Security Objectives Sufficiency
T.UAUSER: The threat of impersonization of an authorized user by an attacker is sufficiently diminished by
O.AUTHORIZATION requiring proper authorization of users gaining access to the TOE. O.MANAGE ensures that
only administrative users (which are assumed to be trustworthy) have the ability to add new users or modify the
attributes of users. Together those objectives ensure that no unauthorized user can impersonate as an authorized user.
T.ACCESS: The threat of an authorized user of the TOE accessing information resources without the permission from
the user responsible for the resource is removed by O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS requiring access control for
resources and the ability for authorized users to specify the access to their resources. This ensures that a user can
access a resource only if the requested type of access has been granted by the user responsible for the management of
access rights to the resource. In addition O.RESIDUAL_INFO ensures that an authorized user can not gain access to
the information contained in a resource after the resource has been released to the system for reuse.
T.COMPROT: The threat of user data being compromised or modified without being detected is removed by
O.COMPROT requiring the ability to set up an Inter-TSF trusted channel between the TOE and another trusted IT
product that protects user data being transferred over this channel from disclosure and undetected modification.
T.OPERATE: The threat of IT asset compromise due to improper administration and operation of the TOE is removed
by O.MANAGE providing functions and facilities necessary to support the administrative users responsible for the
management of TOE security.
T.ROLEDEV: The threat of developing and assigning user roles in a way that undermines security is removed by
O.DUTY which provides the ‘separation of duties’ capability, O.HIERARCHICAL which supports defining roles in
terms of other roles, and O.ROLE which limits access to and operations on resources and objects to members of
authorized roles that permit those operations.
TE.HWMF: The threat of losing data due to hardware malfunction is mitigated by OE.MAINTENANCE requiring the
invocation of diagnostic tools during preventative maintenance periods. In addition OE.RECOVER requires the
organizational procedures to be set up that are able to recover critical data and restart operation in a secure mode in the
case such a hardware malfunction happens.
TE.COR_FILE: The threat of undetected loss of integrity of security enforcing or relevant files of the TOE is
diminished by OE.INSTALL requiring procedures for secure distribution, installation and configuration of systems
thereby ensuring that the system has a secure initial state with the required protection of such files, OE.PROTECT
requiring protection of transferred data in the network the TOE is connected to and OE.INFO_PROTECT requiring
procedures for the appropriate definition of access rights to protect those files when the system is up and running.
OE.RECOVER ensures that the system is securely recovered, which includes the verification of the integrity of
security enforcing or security relevant files as part of the recovery procedures.
A.LOCATE: The assumption on physical protection of the processing resources of the TOE is covered by
OE.PHYSICAL requiring physical protection.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 29 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
A.PROTECT: The assumption on physical protection of all hard- and software as well as the network and peripheral
cabling is covered by the objectives OE.INFO_PROTECT demanding the approval of network and peripheral cabling
and OE.PHYSICAL requiring physical protection.
Note: Physical protection of the network components and cabling is required by A.PROTECTwhich may seem to be
redundant to A.CONNECT. But A.CONNECT also addresses protection against passive wiretapping, which may be
done without having physical access to a hardware component.
A.MANAGE: The assumption on competent administrators is covered by OE.ADMIN requiring competent and
trustworthy administrators and OE.INSTALL requiring procedures for secure distribution, installation and
configuration of systems as well as OE.RECOVER requiring the administrator to perform all the required actions to
bring the TOE into a secure state after a system failure or discontinuity..
A.NO_EVIL_ADMIN: The assumption on administrators that are neither careless nor willfully negligent or hostile is
covered by OE.ADMIN requiring competent and trustworthy administrators and OE.INSTALL requiring procedures
for secure distribution, installation and configuration of systems.
A.COOP: The assumption on authorized users to act in a cooperating manner is covered by the objective
OE.CREDEN requiring the safe storage and non-disclosure of authentication credentials.
A.NET_COMP: The assumption on network components to not modify transmitted data is covered by the objective
OE.PROTECT requiring procedures and/or mechanisms to ensure a safe data transfer between systems as well as
OE.INSTALL requiring proper installation and configuration of all parts of the networked system thus including also
components that are not part of the TOE.
A.PEER:The assumption on the same management control and security policy constraints for systems with which the
TOE communicates is covered by OE.INSTALL requiring procedures for secure distribution, installation and
configuration of the networked system.
A.CONNECT: The assumption on controlled access to peripheral devices and protected internal communication paths
is covered by OE.SERIAL_LOGIN for the protection of attached serial login devices, OE.PROTECT for the
protection of data transferred between systems and OE.PHYSICAL requiring physical protection.
A.UTRAIN: The assumption on trained users is covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT which requires that users are
trained to protect the data belonging to them.
A.UTRUST: The assumption on user to be trusted to protect data is covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT which requires
that users are trusted to use the protection mechanisms of the TOE adequately to protect their data.
A.ASSET: The assumption on the value of the stored assets meriting moderately intrusive attacks is covered by
OE.INFO_PROTECT which requires that protection mechanisms are configured properly.
A.ACCESS:The assumption that roles accurately reflect the user’s job function, responsibilities, qualifications, an/or
competencies within the enterprise is covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT which requires that administrators are trained
to perform configuration tasks properly.
A.OWNER: The limited right of users to create and manage new data object is covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT
which requires that users are trained to perform these tasks properly and not to pass on information to somebody
without the right to access the information.
A.CLEARANCE: The assumption on the procedures for granting authorization for access to specific security levels is
covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT which requires that DAC and MAC protections are set up correctly and that users
are trained to perform these tasks properly.
A.SENSITIVITY: The assumption on the procedures for establishing the security level of all information imported to
or exported from the system including the security level of peripheral devices is covered by OE.INFO_PROTECT
which requires that DAC and MAC protections are set up correctly and that users are trained to perform these tasks
properly.
P.AUTHORIZED_USERS: The policy demanding that users have to be authorized for access to the system is
implemented by O.AUTHORIZATION and supported by O.MANAGE allowing the management of this functions
and O.ENFORCEMENT ensuring the correct invocation of the functions.
P.NEED_TO_KNOW: The policy to restrict access to and modification of information to authorized users which have
a „need to know” for that information is implemented by O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS demanding an appropriate
access control function that allows to define access rights down to the granularity of an individual user and
O.COMPROT protecting user data during transmission to another trusted IT product.. It is supported by
O.RESIDUAL_INFO ensuring that resources do not release such information during reuse and by
OE.SOFTWARE_IN preventing users other than administrative users from installing new software that might affect
the access control functionality. O.MANAGE allows administrative and normal users (for the files they own) to
manage these functions, O. ENFORCEMENT ensures that the functions are invoked and operate correctly.
P.ACCOUNTABILITY: The policy to provide a means to hold users accountable for their activities is implemented by
O.AUDITING providing the TOE with such functionality.
Page 30 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
P.ACCESS:The access rights to specific objects are determined by O.ROLE which provides role-based access
control.
P.CLASSIFICATION: The limitations on access to information based on sensitivity labels are implemented by
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS which provides the mandatory access control policy.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 31 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
5 Extended Components Definition
The component Note 1 was included as stated in [LSPP], it is defined in [LSPP].
Page 32 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6 Security Requirements
6.1 TOE Security Functional Requirements
Most of the following security functional requirements are taken from [LSPP] and [RBACPP], tailored as described
in section 2.3.1 of this document, and including some TOE specific extensions.
Security functional requirements referring to Mandatory Access Control (MAC, including references to sensitivity
labels and user clearances) or Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) apply only when the TOE is operating in LSPP
mode.
In CAPP mode, all roles specified in SFRs are subsumed within the single administrator role (root user with UID 0).
All instantiations are marked in bold within each of the requirements regardless if they have already been defined as
instantiations in one of the Protection Profiles or not. Refinements are marked in bold and italics.
Security Functional requirements in addition to those taken from [LSPP] and [RBACPP] are shown in green with
TOE specific instantiations marked in green and bold.
6.1.1 Security Audit (FAU)
6.1.1.1 Audit Data Generation (FAU_GEN.1)
FAU_GEN.1.1 The TSF shall be able to generate an audit record of the auditable events listed in
column “Event” of Table 6-1 (Auditable Events). This includes the start-up and
shutdown of the audit functions, and all auditable events for the basic level of
audit except FIA_UID.2’s user identity during failures. This includes also the:
i. Assignment of Users, Roles and Privileges to Roles
ii. Deletion of Users, Roles and Privileges from Roles
iii. Creation and Deletion of Roles
FAU_GEN.1.2 The TSF shall record within each audit record at least the following information:
a) Date and time of the event, type of event, subject identity, and the outcome
(success or failure) of the event;
b) The sensitivity labels of subjects, objects, or information involved; and
c) The additional information specified in the “Details” column of Table 5-1
(Auditable Events).
d) For each audit event type, based on the auditable event definitions of the
functional components included in this ST the following information:
i. For each invocation of a security function, the RBAC Administrator role
that made invocation of that security function possible.
ii. For each access control action on the user data, the role that made
possible the invocation of that action.
Table 6-1: Auditable Events
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FAU_GEN.1 Start­up and shutdown of the audit functions. Events ”auditd start”,
”auditd halt” (from
auditd)
FAU_GEN.2 None
FAU_SAR.1 Reading of information from the audit records. Syscall open (on the audit
log files)
FAU_SAR.2 Unsuccessful attempts to read information from
the audit records.
Like FAU_SAR.1, but
with negative results
FAU_SAR.3 None
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 33 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FAU_SEL.1 All modifications to the audit configuration that
occur while the audit collection functions are
operating.
Event “config changed”
(generated by auditd);
syscalls open, link, unlink,
rename, truncate (write
access to configuration
files)
FAU_STG.1 None
FAU_STG.3 Actions taken due to exceeding of a threshold. Event “log file is larger
than
max size” or “low on
disk space” (generated by
auditd); execution of
administrator­specified
alert action such as file
rotation, switch to single
user mode, or system halt
FAU_STG.4 Actions taken due to the audit storage failure. Event “no space left” or
“error writing an event to
disk” (generated by
auditd); execution of
administrator-specified
alert action such as switch
to single user mode or
system halt that terminates
all programs capable of
generating auditable
events
FCS_CKM.1 None
FCS_CKM.2 None
FCS_COP.1 None
FDP_ACC.1 None
FDP_ACF.1 All requests to perform an operation on an object
covered by the SFP.
Syscalls chmod, chown,
setxattr, removexattr, link,
symlink, mknod, open,
rename, truncate, unlink,
rmdir, mount, umount,
msgctl, msgget, semget,
semctl, semop,
semtimedop, shmget,
shmctl; details include
identity of object
FDP_ETC.1 LSPP mode only: All attempts to export
information
Syscalls open, mount,
umount, accept, connect,
sendto, sendmsg
FDP_ETC.2 LSPP mode only: All attempts to export
information
Syscalls open, mount,
umount, accept, connect,
sendto, sendmsg as well as
specific audit records
created by trusted
programs (like star) that
export data with its labels.
Audit messages from the
print spooler indicating
printing of labeled data.
Page 34 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FDP_ETC.2 LSPP mode only: Overriding of human-readable
output marking (Additional)
The TOE will prohibit
overriding of human-
readable output markings
on printed output.
Attempts to do so can be
audited by the trusted
printer spooler
FDP_IFC.2 None
FDP_IFF.2 LSPP mode only: All decisions on requests for
information flow
System calls operating on
objects return failure
(EACCES) if information
flow was denied, other
error codes or success
indicate that the
information flow was
permitted.
FDP_ITC.1 LSPP mode only: All attempts to import user data,
including any security attributes
Syscalls open, mount,
umount, accept, connect,
sendto, sendmsg
FDP_ITC.2 LSPP mode only: All attempts to import user data,
including any security attributes
Syscalls open, mount,
umount, accept, connect,
sendto, sendmsg as well as
specific audit records
created by trusted
programs (like star) that
export data with its labels
FDP_RIP.2 None
Note 1 None
FDP_UCT.1 None
FDP_UIT.1 None
FIA_ATD.1 None
FIA_SOS.1 Rejection or acceptance by the TSF of any tested
secret.
Event “PAM
authentication” (from
PAM framework); details
include origin of attempt
(terminal or IP address as
applicable)
FIA_UAU.2 All use of the authentication mechanism. Event “PAM
authentication” (from
PAM framework)
FIA_UAU.7 None
FIA_UID.2 All use of the user identification mechanism,
including the identity provided during successful
attempts.
Events “PAM
authentication” and “PAM
bad_ident” (from PAM
framework)
FIA_USB.1 Success and failure of binding user security
attributes to a subject (e.g. success and failure to
create a subject).
Event “PAM session
open” (from PAM
framework); syscalls fork,
vfork and clone
Failure: Events ”PAM
authentication” and “PAM
bad_ident” (from PAM
framework, failure status)
FMT_MSA.1 All modifications of the values of security
attributes.
Syscalls chmod, chown,
setxattr, msgctl, semctl,
shmctl; open syscall on
SELinux interface files
/proc/self/attr/current and
/selinux/load
FMT_MSA.2 None
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 35 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FMT_MSA.3 Modifications of the default setting of permissive
or restrictive rules.
All modifications of the initial value of security
attributes.
Syscalls umask, open;
open syscall on SELinux
interface files
/proc/self/attr/exec,
/proc/self/attr/fscreate,
/selinux/load
FMT_MTD.1
Audit Trail
All modifications to the values of TSF data. Syscalls open, rename,
link, unlink, truncate (of
audit log files)
FMT_MTD.1
Audit Events
All modifications to the values of TSF data. Syscalls open, link,
rename, truncate, unlink
(of audit config files);
event ”config change”
FMT_MTD.1
User Attributes
All modifications to the values of TSF data. This
needs to include the creation and deletion of users.
Audit text messages from
“shadow-utils” trusted
programs, details include
new value of of the TSF
data
FMT_MTD.1
Authentication
Data
All modifications to the values of TSF data. Audit text messages from
“shadow-utils” trusted
programs; attempts to
bypass trusted programs
detected through audited
syscalls open, rename,
truncate, unlink
FMT_MTD.1 Management of Roles Audit text messages from
semodule and load_policy
utilities; open syscall on
the SELinux interface file
/selinux/load
FMT_MTD.3
Secure TSF
Data
All rejected values of TSF data Audit text messages from
PAM indicating rejection
of an attempt to select a
weak password
FMT_REV.1 All attempts to revoke security attributes. Event: audit text messages
from “shadow-utils”
trusted programs; attempts
to bypass trusted programs
detected through audited
syscalls open, rename,
truncate, unlink
FMT_REV.1 All modifications to the values of TSF data. System calls chmod,
chown, setxattr, unlink,
truncate, msgctl,
removexattr , semctl,
shmctl
FMT_SMF.1 None (covered by other management functions)
Page 36 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FMT_SMR.2 Modifications to the group of users that are part of
a role including:
 Assignment of users to roles
 Assignment of privileges to roles
 Creation of roles
 Deletion of roles
 Deletion of privileges from roles
Event: audit text messages
from “shadow-utils”
trusted programs``group
member added’’, ``group
member removed’’,
``group administrators
set’’, ``group members
set’’ (from trusted
programs in shadow
suite).
Audit messages from the
semanage tool.
Audit text messages from
the semodule and
load_policy tools
indicating definitions of
new custom roles or
modifications of custom
roles.
FMT_SMR.2 Every use of the rights of a role. (Additional /
Detailed)
The user’s actions result in
audited syscalls and the
use of trusted programs
that are audited. Details
include the login ID, the
origin can be determined
from the associated
LOGIN record for this
login ID and audit session
ID.
FMT_SMR.2 Unsuccessful attempts to use a role due to the
given conditions on the roles
Event: audit text messages
from newrole, login, sshd,
su programs
FPT_AMT.1 Execution of the tests of the underlying machine
and the results of the test.
Event messages “amtu -
*” (generated by AMTU
testing tool)
FPT_FLS.1 Failure of the TSF Event: audit text messages
from programs in
“policycoreutils” suite,
including load_policy,
restorecon, fixfiles,
newrole; audit text
messages from policy
aware programs using
libselinux: login, sshd, su,
crond
FPT_RCV.1 the fact that a failure or service disconuity
occurred
Event: audit text message
from init indicating switch
to single-user run level
FPT_RCV.1 resumption of the regular operation Event: audit text message
from init indicating switch
to multi-user run level
FPT_RCV.1 type of failure or service discontinuity Event: audit text message
from the program
initiating the switch to
single-user mode via
libselinux: auditd, init,
load_policy
FPT_RCV.4 if possible, the impossibility to return to a secure
state after failure of a security function
Event: audit text message
from init indicating a
failure to switch run levels
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 37 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Component Event Details
(Event Names)
FPT_RCV.4 if possible, the detection of a failure of a security
function
Event: audit text message
from init indicating switch
to single-user run level
FPT_STM.1 Changes to the time. Event: syscalls
settimeofday, adjtimex,
clock_settime
FPT_TST.1 Execution of the TSF self tests and the results of
the tests
Event: audit text message
from the rbac-self-test
program
FTA_LSA.1 All attempts at selecting a session security
attributes
Event: audit text messages
from role aware programs
via libselinux: login, sshd,
su, crond
FTA_TSE.1 All attempts at establishment of a user session Event: audit text messages
from role aware programs
via libselinux: login, sshd,
su, crond
FTP_ITC.1 Set-up of trusted channel Event: syscall exec (of
stunnel program)
Application Note: The table lists the names of the events associated with the SFR. Details of the event
specific data recorded with each event are defined in the audit design documentation.
6.1.1.2 User Identity Association (FAU_GEN.2)
FAU_GEN.2.1 The TSF shall be able to associate each auditable event with the identity of the user
that caused the event.
Application Note: The TOE maintains a “Login user ID”, which is inherited by every new process
spawned. This allows the TOE to identify the “real” originator of an event, regardless if
he has changed his real and / or effective and filesystem user ID e. g. using the su
command or executing a setuid or setgid program.
6.1.1.3 Audit Review (FAU_SAR.1)
FAU_SAR.1.1 The TSF shall provide authorized administrator roles with the capability to read all
audit information, including the following, from the audit records:
a) Date and Time of Audit Event
b) The UserID responsible for the Event and optionally the role
membership which enabled the user to perform the event successfully
c) The access control operation and the object on which it was performed.
d) The outcome of the event (success or failure)
e) The User Session Identifier or Terminal Type
FAU_SAR.1.2 The TSF shall provide the audit records in a manner suitable for the user to interpret
the information.
Application Note: The TOE is configured to restrict direct access to the audit records to a user in the audit
administrator role.
6.1.1.4 Restricted Audit Review (FAU_SAR.2)
FAU_SAR.2.1 The TSF shall prohibit all users read access to the audit records, except those users that
have been granted explicit read-access.
Application Note: DAC, RBAC and MAC controls ensure that only users in the audit administrator role
have access to the audit records.
Page 38 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.1.5 Selectable Audit Review (FAU_SAR.3)
FAU_SAR.3.1 The TSF shall provide the ability to perform searches, sorting and ordering of audit
data based on the following attributes:
a) User identity
b) Subject sensitivity label
c) Object sensitivity label
d) group identifier (real and effective)
e) event type
f) outcome (success/failure)
g) login from specific remote hostname
h) login user id
i) process id
j) Role that enabled access
k) Date and Time of Audit event
l) Object name
m) Type of access
n) Any combination of the above items
6.1.1.6 Selective Audit (FAU_SEL.1)
FAU_SEL.1.1 The TSF shall be able to include or exclude auditable events from the set of audited
events based on the following attributes:
a) User identity;
b) Object identity
c) Event type
d) Subject sensitivity label
e) Object sensitivity label
f) Users belonging to a specified role
g) Access types on a particular object
h) system call number
i) directory or file name.
j) subject identity (process ID)
k) host identity
Application Note: The TOE provides the administrator the ability to select the events to audit. This can be
done by the administrator editing the filter configuration file of the audit daemon and
then using the /etc/init.d/audit script with the ‘restart’ parameter to notify the audit
daemon of the change in the configuration. The audit daemon in turn notifies the kernel
of the new auditing policy.
Application Note: The system does not support distributed audit in the evaluated configuration, therefore
the host identity for all audit records on a specific host is always that host. The system
supports defining different audit rules on different hosts which is equivalent to filtering
by host identity in a non-distributed environment.
6.1.1.7 Guarantees of Audit Data Availability (FAU_STG.1)
FAU_STG.1.1 The TSF shall protect the stored audit records from unauthorized deletion.
FAU_STG.1.2 The TSF shall be able to prevent modifications to the audit records.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 39 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Application Note: This is achieved using the DAC and MAC controls.
6.1.1.8 Action in Case of Possible Audit Data Loss (FAU_STG.3)
FAU_STG.3.1 The TSF shall generate an alarm to the authorized administrator if the audit trail
exceeds a value defined in the file auditd.conf for the minimum space required
for the file system the audit log file resides in.
Application Note: The TOE supports several configurable actions, including generating syslog messages
and execution of an admin-defined script. This notification is generated when the audit
trail capacity exceeds the limit defined in the auditd.conf file. This limit and the
corresponding action can be defined by the audit administrator by editing the
auditd.conf file and then reloading the audit configuration.
6.1.1.9 Prevention of Audit Data Loss (FAU_STG.4)
FAU_STG.4.1 The TSF shall be able to prevent auditable events, except those taken by the
authorized administrator, and stop all processes that attempt to generate an audit
record if the audit trail is full.
Application Note: If the audit trail stored on disk gets full, the audit daemon will execute an audit
administrator defined action. The possible actions include a switch to single user mode
or system halt, each of these will terminate all processes capable of generating
auditable events. The audit administrator can then back up the audit trail and make
space available for the audit trail, then restart the TOE in multiuser mode. In the
unlikely event that the space for in-kernel audit entries (for messages in transit to
userspace) is exhausted, the TOE can optionally be configured to panic the system
(instantly terminating all processes) to prevent loss of audit records.
6.1.2 Cryptographic Support (FCS)
Cryptographic key generation (SSL: Symmetric algorithms) (FCS_CKM.1(1))
FCS_CKM.1.1 The TSF shall generate cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key generation algorithm as defined in the SSL v3 standard [SSLv3]
and specified cryptographic key sizes 128 bit (RC4), 168 bit (TDES), 128 bit (AES),
256 bit (AES) that meet the following: generation and exchange of session keys as
defined in the SSL v3 and standard with the cipher suites defined in
FCS_COP.1(2).
Application Note: Generation of symmetric keys is defined in section 6.2 in the SSL v3 standard
[SSLv3]. The OpenSSL library used by the TOE also supports SSL v2, but this is seen
as being not part of the evaluated configuration. The evaluation will assess that the
keys are generated in accordance with the requirements defined in the SSL v3 standard.
With respect to the strength of function, no assessment of the strength of the
cryptographic algorithm itself and no analysis for potential weaknesses of keys with
repect to the algorithm are performed. The key generation process will only be
analysed and rated with respect to the entropy of the input to the key generation
process and with respect to the fact that any postprocessing of this input will maintain
the entropy.
Cryptographic key generation (SSH: Symmetric algorithms) (FCS_CKM.1(2))
FCS_CKM.1.1 The TSF shall generate cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key generation algorithm as defined in the SSH v2.0 standard [SSH-
TRANS] and specified cryptographic key sizes 168 bit (TDES) that meet the
following: generation and exchange of session keys as defined in the SSH v2.0
standard using the Diffie-Hellman key negotiation protocol.
Application Note: For details of the key generation / key negotiation process see section 4.5, chapter 5
and chapter 6 of the SSH Transport Layer Protocol specification [SSH-TRANS] as
published by the Secure Shell Charter of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
The evaluation will assess that the keys are generated in accordance with the
requirements defined in the SSH v2.0 standard. The key generation process will only
be analysed and rated with respect to the entropy of the input to the key generation
Page 40 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
process and with respect to the fact that any postprocessing of this input will maintain
the entropy.
Cryptographic key generation (SSL: RSA) (FCS_CKM.1(3))
FCS_CKM.1.1 The TSF shall generate cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key generation algorithm product specific and specified cryptographic
key sizes 1024 bit that meet the following: not specified
Application Note: The SSL v3 specification does not define how the RSA key pair is generated. This is up
to the implementation. Almost all implementations of the SSL v3 standard have their
own algorithm for RSA key pair generation (if they support cipher suites that use
RSA). Therefore the key generation and algorithm and the standard to follow are not
defined here. Only the required key size is specified. The evaluation will assess that the
keys generated form a correct RSA key pair. The key generation process will only be
analysed and rated with respect to the entropy of the input to the key generation
process and with respect to the primality tests and the probability of the numbers
chosen to be prime.
Cryptographic key distribution (SSL: RSA public keys) (FCS_CKM.2(1))
FCS_CKM.2.1 The TSF shall distribute cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key distribution method digital certificates for public RSA keys that
meets the following: certificate format as defined in the standard X.509 Version 3.
Application Note: This requirement addresses the exchange of public RSA keys as part of the SSL client
and server authentication.
Cryptographic key distribution (SSH: Diffie-Hellman key negotiation) (FCS_CKM.2(2))
FCS_CKM.2.1 The TSF shall distribute cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key distribution method diffie-hellman-group1-sha1 that meets the
following: Specification in Internet Draft: SSH Transport Layer Protocol [SSH-
TRANS].
Application Note: The Diffie-Hellman protocol can be seen as a combined way to generate and distribute
a shared session key between two communicating parties. So the Diffie-Hellman
algorithm used by SSH is mentioned both in the key generation as well as in the key
distribution security functional requirement.
Cryptographic key distribution (SSH: DSS public keys) (FCS_CKM.2(3))
FCS_CKM.2.1 The TSF shall distribute cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key distribution method digital certificates for public DSS keys that
meets the following: ssh-dss key format as defined in: Internet Draft: SSH
Transport Layer Protocol [SSH-TRANS].
Cryptographic key distribution (SSL: Symmetric keys) (FCS_CKM.2(4))
FCS_CKM.2.1 The TSF shall distribute cryptographic keys in accordance with a specified
cryptographic key distribution method Secure Socket Layer handshake using RSA
encrypted exchange of session keys that meets the following: SSL Version 3
[SSLv3].
Application Note: This requirement addresses the exchange of SSL session keys as part of the SSL
handshake protocol.
Cryptographic operation (RSA) (SSL: FCS_COP.1(1))
FCS_COP.1.1 The TSF shall perform digital signature generation and digital signature
verification in accordance with a specified cryptographic algorithm RSA and
cryptographic key sizes 1024 bit that meet the following: SSL Version 3 [SSLv3].
Application Note: This requirement addresses the RSA digital signature generation and verification
operations using the RSA algorithm as required by the SSL session establishment
protocol (provided a cipher suite including RSA is used). Note that the details of the
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 41 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
signature format such as the use of the PKCS#1 block type 1 and block type 2 are
defined in the SSL Version 3 standard.
Cryptographic operation (SSL: Symmetric operations) (FCS_COP.1(2))
FCS_COP.1.1 The TSF shall perform encryption and decryption in accordance with a specified
cryptographic algorithm RC4, TDES and AES and cryptographic key sizes 128 bit
(RC4), 168 bit (TDES), 128 bit (AES) and 256 bit (AES) that meet the following:
SSL Version 3 [SSLv3] and the following cipher suites:
SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA, SSL_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA,
as defined in the SSL v3 standard and TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA,
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA as defined in [TLS-AES].
Cryptographic operation (SSH: Symmetric operations) (FCS_COP.1(3))
FCS_COP.1.1 The TSF shall perform encryption and decryption in accordance with a specified
cryptographic algorithm TDES and cryptographic key sizes 168 bit (TDES) that meet
the following: SSH Transport Layer Protocol [SSH-TRANS] and the following
cipher suite: 3des-cbc as defined in [SSH-TRANS].
6.1.3 User Data Protection (FDP)
6.1.3.1 Discretionary Access Control Policy (FDP_ACC.1) (1)
FDP_ACC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control (DAC) Policy on processes
acting on the behalf of users as subjects and file system objects (ordinary files,
directories, symbolic links, device special files, UNIX Domain socket special files,
named pipes), IPC objects (SYSV and POSIX message queues, SYSV
semaphores, SYSV shared memory segments) and all operations among subjects
and objects covered by the DAC policy.
6.1.3.2 Role-Based Access Control Policy (FDP_ACC.1) (2)
FDP_ACC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Role-based Access Control (RBAC) Policy on processes
acting on the behalf of users as subjects and file system objects (ordinary files,
directories, symbolic links, device special files, UNIX Domain socket special files,
named pipes), IPC objects (SYSV and POSIX message queues, SYSV
semaphores, SYSV shared memory segments) and all operations among subjects
and objects covered by the RBAC policy.
6.1.3.3 Discretionary Access Control Functions (FDP_ACF.1) (1)
FDP_ACF.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control (DAC) Policy to objects
based on the following:
a) The filesystem user identity and group membership(s) associated with a
subject; and
b) The following access control attributes associated with an object:
File system objects:
POSIX ACLs and permission bits.
(ACLs can be used to grant or deny access to the granularity of a single
user or group using Access Control Entries. Those ACL entries include the
standard Unix permission bits. Posix ACLs can be used for file system
objects within the ext3 file system).
Access rights for file system objects are:
- read
- write
- execute (ordinary files)
- search (directories)
Page 42 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
IPC objects:
permission bits
Access rights for IPC objects are:
- read
- write
FDP_ACF.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the following rules to determine if an operation among
controlled subjects and controlled objects is allowed:
File system objects within the ext3 file system:
A subject must have search permission for every element of the pathname
and the requested access for the object. A subject has a specific type access
to an object if:
 The subject has been granted access according to the
ACL_USER_OBJ or ACL_OTHER type entry in the ACL of the
object
Or
 The subject has been granted access by an ACL_USER,
ACL_GROUP_OBJ or ACL_GROUP entry and the associated
right is also granted by the ACL_MASK entry of the ACL if the
ACL_MASK entry exist
Or
 The subject has been granted access by the ACL_GROUP_OBJ
entry and no ACL_MASK entry exists in the ACL of the object.
File system objects in other file systems:
A subject must have search permission for every element of the
pathname and the requested access for the object. A subject has a
specific type access to an object if:
 The subject has the filesystem userid of the owner of the object and
the requested type of access is within the permission bits defined
for the owner
Or
 The subject has not the filesystem userid of the owner of the object
but the filesystem group id identical to the file system objects
group id and the requested type of access is within the permission
bits defined for the group
Or
 The subject has neither the filesystem userid of the owner of the
object nor is the filesystem group id identical to the file system
object group id and requested type of access is within the
permission bits defined for “world”
IPC objects:
Access permissions are defined by permission bits of the IPC object. The
process creating the object defines the creator, owner and group based on
the userid of the current process. Access of a process to an IPC object is
allowed, if
 the effective userid of the of the current process is equal to the
userid of the IPC object creator or owner and the „owner”
permission bit for the requested type of access is set or
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 43 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 the effective userid of the current process is not equal to the userid
of the IPC object creator or owner and the effective group id of the
current process is equal to the group id of the IPC object and the
„group” permission bit for the requested type of access is set or
 The „world” permission bit for the requested type of access is set
for users that do not satisfy one of the first two conditions
FDP_ACF.1.3 The TSF shall explicitly authorize access of subjects to objects based on the following
additional rules:
File System Objects:
A process with a user ID of 0 is known as a root user process. These
processes are generally allowed all access permissions. But if a root user
process requests execute permission for a program (as a file system object),
access is granted only if execute permission is granted to at least one user.
IPC objects:
A process with a user ID of 0 is known as a root user process. These
processes are generally allowed all access permissions.
FDP_ACF.1.4 The TSF shall explicitly deny access of subjects to objects based on the following
rules:
Write access to file system objects other than device special files on a file system
mounted as read-only is always denied.
Write access to a file marked as immutable is always denied.
6.1.3.4 Role-Based Access Control Functions (FDP_ACF.1) (2)
FDP_ACF.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to objects based on the following user
attributes:
a) User identity; and
b) Authorized roles for the user
The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to objects based on the following subject
attributes:
a) Subject Identity
b) Role(s) which can invoke the subject
The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to objects based on the following object
attributes:
a) Object Identity
b) Operations permitted on the objects for various Roles
FDP_ACF.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the following rules to determine if any operation among
controlled subjects and controlled objects is allowed: The subject invoking the
operation on an object is assigned to a role whose privilege set includes the
operation on the object.
FDP_ACF.1.3 The TSF shall explicitly authorise access of subjects to objects based on the following
additional rules: Allow an access operation by a subject on an object only if the
user associated with the subject belongs to a role that permits the access
operation on the object.
FDP_ACF.1.4 The TSF shall explicitly deny access of subjects to objects based on the user
associated with the subject not belonging to any role that permits the requested
access operation on the object
Page 44 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.3.5 Export of Unlabeled User Data (FDP_ETC.1)
FDP_ETC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy when exporting
unlabeled user data, controlled under the MAC policy, outside the TSC.
FDP_ETC.1.2 The TSF shall export the unlabeled user data without the user data’s associated
security attributes.
LSPP Note6 The TSF shall enforce the following rules when unlabeled user data is exported from
the TSC:
a) Devices used export data without security attributes cannot be used to export
data with security attributes unless the change in device state is performed
manually and is auditable;
b) Only data with the same sensitivity label as the sensitivity label of the device
can be exported using the device.
6.1.3.6 Export of Labeled User Data (FDP_ETC.2)
FDP_ETC.2.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy when exporting labeled
user data, controlled under the MAC policy, outside the TSC.
FDP_ETC.2.2 The TSF shall export the labeled user data with the user data’s associated security
attributes.
FDP_ETC.2.3 The TSF shall ensure that the security attributes, when exported outside the TSC, are
unambiguously associated with the exported labeled user data.
FDP_ETC.2.4 The TSF shall enforce the following rules when labeled user data is exported from the
TSC:
a) When data is exported in a human-readable or printable form:
 The authorized administrator shall be able to specify the printable label which
is assigned to the sensitivity label associated with the data.
 Each print job shall be marked at the beginning and end with the printable
label assigned to the “least upper bound” sensitivity label of all the data
exported in the print job.
 Each page of printed output shall be marked with the printable label assigned
to the “least upper bound” sensitivity label of all the data exported to the page.
By default this marking shall appear on both the top and bottom of each
printed page.
b) Devices used to export data with security attributes cannot be used to export data
without security attributes unless the change in device state is performed manually
and is auditable;
c) Devices used to export data with security attributes shall completely and
unambiguously associate the security attributes with the corresponding data;
d) No additional rules.
6.1.3.7 Mandatory Access Control Policy (FDP_IFC.1)
FDP_IFC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy on tasks operating on
behalf of a user, file system objects, IPC objects, network objects, and all
operations among subjects and objects covered by the MAC policy.
6.1.3.8 Mandatory Access Control Functions (FDP_IFF.2)
FDP_IFF.2.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy based on the following
types of subject and information security attributes:
a) The sensitivity label of the subject; and
b) The sensitivity label of the object containing the information.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 45 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Sensitivity label of subjects and objects shall consist of the following:
 A hierarchical level; and
 A set of non-hierarchical categories.
FDP_IFF.2.2 The TSF shall permit an information flow between a controlled subject and controlled
information via a controlled operation if the following rules, based on the ordering
relationships between security attributes hold:
a) If the sensitivity label of the subject is greater than or equal to the sensitivity
label of the object, then the flow of information from the object to the subject
is permitted (a read operation);
b) If the sensitivity label of the object is greater than or equal to the sensitivity
label of the subject; then the flow of information from the subject to the
object is permitted (a write operation);
c) If the sensitivity label of subject A is greater than or equal to the sensitivity
label of subject B; then the flow of information from subject B to subject A is
permitted.
FDP_IFF.2.3 The TSF shall enforce the no additional rules.
FDP_IFF.2.4 The TSF shall provide the following no additional rules.
FDP_IFF.2.5 The TSF shall explicitly authorize an information flow based on the following rules:
trusted subjects with MLS override capabilities can access objects without being
restricted by subject and object labels. Trusted objects can be accessed by any
subject.
FDP_IFF.2.6 The TSF shall explicitly deny an information flow based on the following rules: none.
FDP_IFF.2.7 The TSF shall enforce the following relationships for any two valid sensitivity labels:
a) There exists an ordering function that, given two valid sensitivity labels,
determines if the sensitivity labels are equal, if one sensitivity label is greater than
the other, or if the sensitivity labels are incomparable; and
 Sensitivity labels are equal if the hierarchical level of both labels are equal
and the non-hierarchically category sets are equal.
 Sensitivity label A is greater than sensitivity label B if one of the following
conditions exists:
- If the hierarchical level of A is greater than the hierarchical level of B,
and the non-hierarchical category set of A is equal to the non-
hierarchical category set of B.
- If the hierarchical level of A is equal to the hierarchical level of B, and
the non-hierarchical category set of A is a proper super-set of the
nonhierarchical category set of B.
- If the hierarchical level of A is greater than the hierarchical level of B,
and the non-hierarchical category set of A is a proper super-set of the
nonhierarchical category set of B.
 Sensitivity labels are incomparable if they are not equal and neither label is
greater than the other.
b) There exists a “least upper bound” in the set of sensitivity labels, such that, given
any two valid sensitivity labels, there is a valid sensitivity label that is greater than
or equal to the two valid sensitivity labels; and
c) There exists a “greatest lower bound” in the set of the sensitivity labels, such that,
given any two valid sensitivity labels, there is a valid sensitivity label that is not
greater than the two valid sensitivity labels.
Page 46 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Application Note: The TOE enforces an additional restriction on write operations. The subject and object
labels must be equal to ensure integrity. This “write equal” policy is a stricter variant of the
“write up” policy described in this SFR.
6.1.3.9 Import of Unlabeled User Data (FDP_ITC.1)
FDP_ITC.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy when importing
unlabeled user data, controlled under the MAC policy, from outside the TSC.
FDP_ITC.1.2 The TSF shall ignore any security attributes associated with the unlabeled user data
when imported from outside the TSC.
FDP_ITC.1.3 The TSF shall enforce the following rules when importing unlabeled user data
controlled under the MAC policy from outside the TSC:
a) Devices used to import data without security attributes cannot be used to import
data with security attributes unless the change in device state is performed
manually and is auditable.
b) No additional rules.
6.1.3.10 Import of Labeled User Data (FDP_ITC.2)
FDP_ITC.2.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy when importing labeled
user data, controlled under the MAC policy, from outside the TSC.
FDP_ITC.2.2 The TSF shall use the security attributes associated with the imported labeled user
data.
FDP_ITC.2.3 The TSF shall ensure that the protocol used provides for the unambiguous association
between security attributes and the labeled user data received.
FDP_ITC.2.4 The TSF shall ensure that interpretation of the security attributes of the imported
labeled user data is as intended by the source of the user data.
FDP_ITC.2.5 The TSF shall enforce the following rules when importing labeled user data controlled
under the MAC policy from outside the TSC:
a) Devices used to import data with security attributes cannot be used to import data
without security attributes unless the change in device state is performed manually
and is auditable;
b) No additional rules
6.1.3.11 Object Residual Information Protection (FDP_RIP.2)
FDP_RIP.2.1 The TSF shall ensure that any previous information content of a resource is made
unavailable upon the allocation of the resource to all objects.
6.1.3.12 Subject Residual Information Protection (Note 1)
NOTE 1 The TSF shall ensure that any previous information content of a resource is made
unavailable upon the allocation of the resource to all subjects.
Basic data exchange confidentiality (FDP_UCT.1)
FDP_UCT.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy, Role-based Access
Control Policy, and Mandatory Access Control Policy to be able to transmit and
receive objects in a manner protected from unauthorised disclosure.
Application Note: Confidentiality of data during transmission is ensured when the one of the secured
protocols ssh or ssl are used. User processes are still bound by the discretionary access
control policy with respect to the data they are able to transfer. The TOE is able act
both as a server and a client for ssh and ssl connections.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 47 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Data exchange integrity (FDP_UIT.1)
FDP_UIT.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy, Role-based Access
Control Policy, and Mandatory Access Control Policy to be able to transmit and
receive user data in a manner protected from modification and insertion errors.
FDP_UIT.1.2 The TSF shall be able to determine on receipt of user data, whether modification or
insertion has occurred.
Application Note: Integrity of data during transmission is ensured when the one of the secured protocols
ssh or ssl are used. User processes are still bound by the discretionary access control
policy with respect to the data they are able to transfer. The TOE is able act both as a
server and a client for ssh and ssl connections.
6.1.4 Identification and Authentication (FIA)
6.1.4.1 User Attribute Definition (FIA_ATD.1)
FIA_ATD.1.1 The TSF shall maintain the following list of security attributes belonging to individual
users:
a) User Identifier;
b) Group Memberships;
c) Authentication Data;
d) User Clearances
e) List of Security-relevant Roles; and
f) no other attributes
Application Note: The “List of Security-relevant Roles” corresponds to the “Security-Relevant Roles” [LSPP] and
“List of Authorized Roles” [RBACPP].
Application Note: “Authentication data” includes all data needed for successfully authenticating a user or changing
the authentication token. This consists of the user’s password, password age, hashes of
previously used passwords, and information about locked or expired accounts.
6.1.4.2 Strength of Authentication Data (FIA_SOS.1)
FIA_SOS.1.1 The TSF shall provide a mechanism to verify that secrets meet the following:
a) For each attempt to use the authentication mechanism, the probability that
a random attempt will succeed is less than one in 1,000,000;
b) For multiple attempts to use the authentication mechanism during a one
minute period, the probability that a random attempt during that minute
will succeed is less than one in 100,000; and
c) Any feedback given during an attempt to use the authentication mechanism
will not reduce the probability below the above metrics.
6.1.4.3 Authentication (FIA_UAU.2)
FIA_UAU.2.1 The TSF shall require each user to be successfully authenticated before allowing any
other TSF-mediated actions on behalf of that user.
Application Note: Untrusted processes running on behalf of a normal user may use network functions to import
and export data they have access to. This process may therefore export user data without
authenticating or even knowing the identity of a user receiving such data. This is not considered
to be a violation of the security policy with respect to identification and authentication and
discretionary access control, since it is well-known that discretionary access control can not
control flow of information. An example of such an export function is a user process running a
web-server on an unprivileged port. Still this process is limited in its access by the security
policy of the TOE.
Page 48 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.4.4 Protected Authentication Feedback (FIA_UAU.7)
FIA_UAU.7.1 The TSF shall provide only obscured feedback to the user while the authentication is
in progress.
6.1.4.5 Identification (FIA_UID.2)
FIA_UID.2.1 The TSF shall require each user to identify itself before allowing any other TSF-
mediated actions on behalf of that user.
6.1.4.6 User-Subject Binding (FIA_USB.1)
FIA_USB.1.1 The TSF shall associate the following user security attributes with subjects acting on
the behalf of that user:
a) The user identity which is associated with auditable events;
b) The user identity or identities which are used to enforce the Discretionary
Access Control Policy;
c) The group membership or memberships used to enforce the Discretionary
Access Control Policy;
d) The sensitivity label used to enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy,
which consists of the following:
 A hierarchical level; and
 A set of non-hierarchical categories.
e) The current role the user is operating with (from the list of roles the user is
allowed to operate with).
FIA_USB.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the following rules on the initial association of user security
attributes with subjects acting on the behalf of a user:
a) The sensitivity label associated with a subject shall be within the clearance
range of the user;
b) Upon successful identification and authentication, the login user ID, the real
user ID, the filesystem user ID and the effective user ID shall be those
specified in the user entry for the user that has authenticated successfully.
c) Upon successful identification and authentication, the real group ID, the
filesystem group ID and the effective group ID shall be those specified via the
group membership attribute in the user entry.
d) The role associated with a subject shall be one of the authorized roles
assigned to the user.
FIA_USB.1.3 The TSF shall enforce the following rules governing changes to the user security
attributes associated with subjects acting on the behalf of a user:
a) The effective and filesystem user ID of a user can be changed by the use of an
executable with the setuid bit set. In this case the program is executed with
the effective and filesystem user ID of the program owner. Access rights are
then evaluated using the filesystem user ID of the program owner. The real
and login user ID remain unchanged.
b) The effective, filesystem and real user ID of a user can be changed by the su
command. In this case the real, filesystem and effective user ID of the user is
changed to the user specified in the su command (provided authentication is
successful). The login user ID remains unchanged.
c) The filesystem and effective group ID of a user can be changed by the use of
an executable with the setgid bit set. In this case the program is executed with
the filesystem and effective group ID of the program owner. Access rights are
then evaluated using the filesystem group ID of the program owner.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 49 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
d) Roles can be changed by executing trusted programs for which the SELinux
policy defines a role transition, such as the newrole program (provided the
authentication is successful).
e) Privileged subjects can change their own security attributes.
Application Note: Privileged executables for which the SELinux policy defines a domain or role transition have
a SELinux type whose name ends in “_exec_t”, for example newrole_exec_t.
6.1.5 Security Management (FMT)
6.1.5.1 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (1)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy to restrict the ability
to modify the access control attributes associated with a named object to users in
administrative roles allowing modification of access control attributes and the
owner of the object. For IPC objects also the original creator of the object has the
ability to modify the access control attributes.
6.1.5.2 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (2)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy to restrict the ability to
modify the sensitivity label associated with an object to the role allowed to modify
sensitivity labels of objects.
6.1.5.3 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (3)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to restrict the ability to modify, delete, and
create instances of the following user security attribute to a set of RBAC
Administrative Roles:
(a) User Role Authorizations
6.1.5.4 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (4)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to restrict the ability to create the following
user security attribute to a set of RBAC Administrative Roles:
(a) Default Active Role Set
6.1.5.5 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (5)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to restrict the ability to modify the
composition of the following session security attribute to session owner:
(a) Active Role set for a user
6.1.5.6 Management of Object Security Attributes (FMT_MSA.1) (6)
FMT_MSA.1.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to restrict the ability to modify the object
security attributes to
(i) Object Owners and
(ii) set of RBAC administrative roles.
Secure security attributes (FMT_MSA.2)
FMT_MSA.2.1 The TSF shall ensure that only secure values are accepted for security attributes.
Application Note: This requirement is included as a dependency from the security functional
requirements FCS_CKM.1, FCS_CKM.2 and FCS_COP.1. The assessment with
respect to this requirement in the evaluatiuon of this TOE does not include any
assessment of the cryptographic strength of the keys generated or used. Instead the
assessment with respect to this requirement just includes an assessment that the TOE
protects those keys from unauthorized access, disclosure or tampering.
Page 50 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.5.7 Static Attribute Initialization (FMT_MSA.3) (1)
FMT_MSA.3.1 The TSF shall enforce the Discretionary Access Control Policy to provide restrictive
default values for security attributes that are used to enforce the Discretionary Access
Control Policy.
FMT_MSA.3.2 The TSF shall allow the users in an administrative role and the owner of the object
to specify alternative initial values to override the default values when an object or
information is created.
6.1.5.8 Static Attribute Initialization (FMT_MSA.3) (2)
FMT_MSA.3.1 The TSF shall enforce the Mandatory Access Control Policy to provide restrictive
default values for security attributes that are used to enforce the Mandatory Access
Control Policy.
FMT_MSA.3.2 The TSF shall allow the users in an administrative role to specify alternative initial
values to override the default values when an object or information is created.
Application Note: The term SFP in FMT_MSA.3.1 in Volume 2 of the Common Criteria is printed in
italics but is not as one would expected stated as “[assignment: SFP]”. It is assumed
that such an assignment was intended by the authors of the CC and has therefore been
performed here.
6.1.5.9 Static Attribute Initialization (FMT_MSA.3) (3)
FMT_MSA.3.1 The TSF shall enforce the RBAC SFP to provide administrative user defined default
values for security attributes that are used to enforce the RBAC SFP.
FMT_MSA.3.2 The TSF shall allow the following roles to specify alternative initial values to override
the default values when an object or information is created:
a) Set of RBAC Administrative Roles
6.1.5.10 Management of the Audit Trail (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to create, delete, and clear the audit trail to
authorized administrators.
Application Note: This requirement is implemented using the discretionary access control features of the
TOE to protect the files holding the audit trail.
6.1.5.11 Management of Audited Events (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to modify or observe the set of audited events to
authorized administrators.
Application Note: This requirement is implemented using the discretionary access control features of the
TOE to protect the audit configuration files.
6.1.5.12 Management of User Attributes (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to initialize and modify the user security
attributes, other than authentication data, to users in a properly authorized
administrative role.
6.1.5.13 Initialization of Authentication Data (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to initialize the authentication data to users in a
properly authorized administrative role.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 51 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.5.14 Management of Authentication Data (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to modify the authentication data to the following:
a) users in a properly authorized administrative role; and
b) users, which are allowed to modify their own authentication data
6.1.5.15 Management of Roles (FMT_MTD.1)
FMT_MTD.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to modify and create the following list of TSF Data
to a set of RBAC Administrative Roles:
a) Role Definitions & Role Attributes
b)Role Hierarchies (by assigning one or more roles to other roles)
c) Constraints among Role Relationships
6.1.5.16 Secure TSF Data (FMT_MTD.3)
FMT_MTD.3.1 The TSF shall ensure that only secure values are accepted for TSF data.
Application Note: The TOE implements a password quality checking mechanism which prevents users
from selecting weak passwords.
6.1.5.17 Revocation of User Attributes (FMT_REV.1)
FMT_REV.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to revoke security attributes associated with the users
within the TSC to a set of administrative roles.
FMT_REV.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the rules:
a) The immediate revocation of security-relevant authorizations; and
b) Revocations/modifications made by an authorized administrator to security
attributes of a user such as the user identifier, user name, user group(s), user
password or user login shell shall be effective the next time the user logs in.
Application Note: Like other UNIX type operating systems, the TOE does not enforce “immediate
revocation” for user security attributes. To achieve this, the system administrator has to
check if the user whose security attributes have been changed is currently logged in. If
this is the case, the system administrator has to “force” the user to log off as indicated
in the CAPP Application Note.
6.1.5.18 Revocation of Object Attributes (FMT_REV.1)
FMT_REV.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the ability to revoke security attributes associated with objects
within the TSC to users authorized to modify the security attributes by the
Discretionary Access Control, Role-Based Access Control Policy and Mandatory
Access Control policies.
Application Note: The policies define the rights of object owners and administrative roles authorized to
revoke security attributes. The revocation is permitted only if all applicable policies
allow the revocation.
FMT_REV.1.2 The TSF shall enforce the rules:
a) The access rights associated with an object shall be enforced when an access
check is made; and
b) The rules of the Mandatory Access Control policy are enforced on all future
operations; and
c) Access rights to file system and IPC objects are checked when the object is
opened. Revocations of access rights for file system objects become effective
the next time a user affected by the revocation tries to open a file system
object.
Page 52 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Application Note: Like most other UNIX type operating systems the TOE implements delayed revocation
as indicated in the CAPPApplication Note (cf. section 6.1.5.17 of this document). The
next “access to the object” revocation requirement from [RBACPP] and the “all future
operations” requirement from [LSPP] are interpreted as referring to the time of the next
access check.
Specification of Management Functions (FMT_SMF.1)
FMT_SMF.1.1 The TSF shall be capable of performing the following security management functions:
 Object security attributes management
 User attribute management
 Authentication data management
 Audit event management
Application Note: This security functional requirement is not included in [CAPP] and was added because
a dependency from FMT_MSA.1 and FMT_MTD.1 to this new component has been
defined in [CC].
6.1.5.19 Security Management Roles (FMT_SMR.2)
FMT_SMR.2.1 The TSF shall maintain the roles:
a) Set of RBAC administrative roles;
b) users authorized by the Discretionary Access Control Policy to modify object
security attributes;
c) users authorized by the Mandatory Access Control Policy to modify object
security attributes;
d) users authorized to modify their own authentication data; and
e) users not authorized to modify their own authentication data.
FMT_SMR.2.2 The TSF shall be able to associate users with roles.
FMT_SMR.2.3 The TSF shall ensure that the following conditions for (a) Roles of Object Owners
and (b) the set of RBAC administrative roles are satisfied:
(a) Object Owners can modify security attributes for only the objects they own
(except for the sensitivity label)
(b) The set of RBAC administrative roles can modify security attributes for all
objects under the control of TOE (since they automatically inherit the
privileges of all Object Owners).
Application Note: The role model supported by the TOE in CAPP mode is a very simple one: the
administrative user is root (extended to all members of the wheel group that may su to
root). All other users of the system have the user role.
6.1.6 Protection of the TOE Security Functions (FPT)
6.1.6.1 Abstract Machine Testing (FPT_AMT.1)
FPT_AMT.1.1 The TSF shall run a suite of tests at the request of an authorized administrator to
demonstrate the correct operation of the security assumptions provided by the abstract
machine that underlies the TSF.
Application Note: The abstract machine testing tool is platform dependent. Chapter 7.2.10.7 describes the
tool.
6.1.6.2 Failure with preservation of Secure State (FPT_FLS.1)
FPT_FLS.1.1 The TSF shall preserve a secure state when the following failures occur:
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 53 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The entire RBAC database containing data on Privileges assigned to a role,
Users authorized for a role, Role constraints and relationships or some specific
tables containing subsets of these data are off-line, corrupt or inaccessible.
6.1.6.3 Manual Recovery (FPT_RCV.1)
FPT_RCV.1.1 After a failure or service discontinuity, the TSF shall enter a maintenance mode
where the ability to return the TOE to a secure state is provided.
6.1.6.4 Function Recovery (FPT_RCV.4)
FPT_RCV.4.1 The TSF shall ensure that the following SFs and failure scenarios have the property
that the SF either completes successfully, or for the indicated failure scenarios,
recovers to a consistent and secure state:
a) The SF that checks whether a specified privilege is assigned to any role but the
database containing the privilege data is not on-line or the particular data table
is inaccessible.
b) The SF that checks whether a specified role has been assigned to a particular
user but the database containing the role membership information is not on-
line or the particular data table is inaccessible.
6.1.6.5 Reliable Time Stamps (FPT_STM.1)
FPT_STM.1.1 The TSF shall be able to provide reliable time stamps for its own use.
Application Note: The TOE uses a hardware timer to maintain its own time stamp. This hardware timer is
protected from tampering by untrusted subjects. The start value for this timer may be
set by the system administrator, but the system administrator may also start a program
that uses an external trusted time source to set this initial value.
6.1.6.6 Inter-TSF basic TSF data consistency (FPT_TDC.1) (LSPP mode only)
FPT_TDC.1.1 The TSF shall provide the capability to consistently interpret sensitivity labels when
shared between the TSF and another trusted IT product.
FPT_TDC.1.2 The TSF shall use administrator-defined sensitivity label mapping rules when
interpreting the TSF data from another trusted IT product.
Application Note: The TOE supports using IPsec security associations (SA) to exchange label
information among systems. Note that IPsec encryption and authentication is beyond
the scope of this Security Target, it is only considered as a label exchange mechanism.
Application Note: This security functional requirement is not included in [LSPP] and was added because
a dependency from FDP_ITC.2 to this new component has been defined in [CC].
6.1.6.7 TSF Self Test (FPT_TST.1)
FPT_TST.1.1 The TSF shall run a suite of self tests at the request of the authorised user to
demonstrate the correct operation of the TSF.
FPT_TST.1.2 The TSF shall provide authorised users with the capability to verify the integrity of
TSF data.
FPT_TST.1.3 The TSF shall provide authorised users with the capability to verify the integrity of
stored TSF executable code.
6.1.7 TOE Access (FTA)
6.1.7.1 Limitation on Scope of Selectable Attributes (FTA_LSA.1)
FTA_LSA.1.1 The TSF shall restrict the scope of the session security attributes Active Role Set for
the User based on the set of Authorized Roles for the User.
Page 54 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.1.7.2 TOE Session Establishment (FTA_TSE.1)
FTA_TSE.1.1 The TSF shall be able to deny session establishment based on the default active role
set for the user being empty.
Application Note: The system does not permit empty role sets to be specified for a user. Administrators cannot
define users without assigning at least one role, and cannot delete a role definition if the system
still has users assigned to that role. It is not possible to establish a session with an empty set of
roles, therefore this SFR is met implicitly.
6.1.8 Trusted path/channels (FTP)
6.1.8.1 Inter-TSF trusted channel (FTP_ITC.1)
FTP_ITC.1.1 The TSF shall provide a communication channel between itself and a remote trusted IT
product that is logically distinct from other communication channels and provides
assured identification of its end points and protection of the channel data from
modification or disclosure.
FTP_ITC.1.2 The TSF shall permit the TSF or the remote trusted IT product to initiate
communication via the trusted channel.
FTP_ITC.1.3 The TSF shall initiate communication via the trusted channel for communication
channel that use the SSH v2.0 or SSL v3 protocol offered as services by the TOE.
6.2 Security Requirements for the IT Environment
No security functional requirements for the IT environment are applicable, because all security functions are
completely implemented without any support from the IT environment.
6.3 Security Requirements for the Non-IT Environment
All the security objectives for the TOE environment address physical protection of the TOE or procedures that need to
be obeyed by administrative users.
6.4 Security Requirements Rationale
This section provides the rationale for the internal consistency and completeness of the security functional
requirements defined in this Security Target.
6.4.1 Internal Consistency of Requirements
This section describes the mutual support and internal consistency of the components selected for this Security Target.
These properties are discussed for both functional and assurance components.
The functional components were selected from CC components defined in part 2 of the Common Criteria. Functional
component FMT_SMF.1 (Specification of Management Functions) has been added in accordance with [CC]. The use
of component refinement was accomplished in accordance with CC guidelines. Functional requirement “Note 1” has
been taken from the Controlled Access Protection Profile [CAPP] and the justification for this extension has been
addressed in the evaluation of this protection profile.
Multiple instantiation of identical or hierarchically-related components was used to clearly state the required
functionality that exists in this Security Target.
For internal consistency of the requirements we provide the following rationale:
Audit
The requirements for auditing have been completely derived from [LSPP]. The rationale for those requirements is:
FAU_GEN.1 defines the events that the TOE is required to be able to audit. Those events are related to the other
security functional requirements showing which event contributes to make users accountable for their actions with
respect to the requirement. FAU_GEN.2 requires that the events are associated with the identity of the user that caused
the event. Of course this can only be done if the user is known (which may not be the case for failed login attempts).
FAU_SAR.1 ensures that authorized administrators are able to evaluate the audit records, while FAU_SAR.2 requires
that no other users can read the audit records (since they may contain sensitive information). Taking into account that
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 55 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
the amount of audit records gathered may be very large, FAU_SAR.3 requires that the TOE provides the ability to
search the audit records for a set that satisfies defined attributes.
To avoid that always all possible audit records are generated (which would result in an unacceptable overhead to the
system performance and might easily fill up the available disk space) the TOE is required in FAU_SEL.1 to provide
the possibility to restrict the events to be audited based on a set of defined attributes.
Requirement FAU_STG.1 defines that audit records need to be protected from unauthorized deletion and modification
to ensure their completeness and correctness. Requirement FAU_STG.3 addresses the aspect that the system detects a
shortage in the disk space that can be used to store the audit trail. In this case the administrator is informed about the
potential problem and can take the necessary precautions to avoid a critical situation.
FAU_STG.4 addresses the problem that the TOE might not be able to record further audit records (e. g. due to the
shortage of some resources). Also in this case the TOE needs to ensure that such a situation can not be misused by a
user to bypass the auditing of critical activities. Otherwise a user might deliberately bring the TOE into a situation
where it is no longer able to audit critical events just to avoid that a critical action he performs is audited.
Management of audit is addressed by FMT_MTD.1 for both the audit trail and audited events.
Secure Communication
The TOE provides two protocols that allow applications or users to securely communicate with other trusted IT
products (which may be other instantiations of the TOE). Those protocols use cryptographic functions to ensure the
confidentiality and integrity of the user data during transmission as required by FDP_UCT.1 (confidentiality) and
FDP_UIT.1 (integrity). The two protocols – although based on the same library of cryptographic functions – use
different cryptographic algorithms to provide the required protection.
Both protocols provide the ability to establish an Inter-TSF trusted channel, as required by FTP_ITC.1.
The secure generation of cryptographic passwords used for secure communications is addressed by FMT_MSA.2.
The management of cryptographic keys is addressed by the multiple instantiations of FCS_CKM.1 and FCS_CKM.2.
The cryptographic operations are addressed by the multiple instantiations of FCS_COP.1.
Discretionary Access Control
FDP_ACC.1(1) requires the existence of a Discretionary Access Control Policy for file system objects and Inter
Process Communication objects. The rules of this policy are described in FDP_ACF.1(1). Management of access
rights is defined in FMT_MSA.1 and FMT_REV.1. To be effective a discretionary access control mechanism requires
user's to be properly identified and authenticated (as required by FIA_UID.2 and FIA_UAU.2), and proper binding of
subjects to users (as required by FIA_USB.1). The policy is also supported by the requirement for residual
information protection (FDP_RIP.2) which prohibits that users access information they are not authorized to via
residuals remaining in objects that the allocate.
Mandatory Access Control (LSPP mode only)
FDP_IFC.1 requires sensitivity label based mandatory access control for the named objects. The rules enforced are
defined in FDP_IFF.2. With mandatory access control active the import and export of both data with its sensitivity
labels and data without its sensitivity labels has be performed in accordance with the mandatory access control policy.
This is expressed with the requirements FDP_ITC.1 and FDP_ITC.2 (for import) and FDP_ETC.1 and FDP_ETC.2
(for export). Assigning of sensitivity labels to a user upon login is defined in FIA_USB.1. Assignment of initial values
for the sensitivity labels when creating a named object is defined in FMT_MSA.3(2). Label exchange is defined in
FPT_TDC.1.
Role-based Access Control (LSPP mode only)
FDP_ACC.1(2) and FDP_ACF.1(2) are instantiations that define the role-based access control policy. Roles
themselves are defined in FMT_SMR.2. Management of object security attributes is defined by the instantiations
FMT_MSA.1(3,4,5,6) and their initial values by FMT_MSA.3(3). Assigning roles to a user upon login is defined in
FIA_USB.1.
Identification and Authentication
As stated above Identification and Authentication is required for a useful discretionary access control based on the
identity of individual users. FIA_UAU.2 and FIA_UID.2 require that users are authenticated before they can perform
any action on the TOE. FIA_SOS.1 ensures that the mechanism used for authentication (passwords) has a minimum
strength and FIA_UAU.7 provides some level of protection against simple spoofing in the TOE environment. Since
the TOE implements processes acting on behalf of the user FIA_USB.1 ensures that those processes act within the
limits defined for the user they are acting for (unless they are trusted to perform activities beyond the rights of the
user). FMT_MTD.3 ensures secure values for password selection.
The TOE needs to ensure that appropriate controls are in place for session establishment initiated by users. This is
expressed with the security requirements FTA_LSA.1 and FTA_TSE.1.
Page 56 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Object Reuse
As stated above object reuse (as required by FDP_RIP.2 and Note 1) is a supporting function that prohibits easy
access to information via residuals left in objects when they are re-allocated to another subject or object. As this the
function supports the intention of the discretionary access control policy.
Security Management
The functions defined so far require several management functions as defined by FMT_SMF.1.
The first one is the management of access rights (as defined by the iterations of FMT_MSA.1 and FMT_REV.1
“Revocation of Object Attributes”). In addition new objects have default access rights which are required by the
iterations of FMT_MSA.3.
The second one is the management of users, which is defined in FMT_MTD.1 “Management of User Attributes” and
FMT_REV.1 “Revocation of User Attributes”. Since passwords are used for authentication the management of this
authentication data is also required in FMT_MTD.1 “Management of Authentication Data” and FMT_MTD.1
“Initialization of Authentication Data”. Management of the audit subsystem is expressed by the requirements for the
management of the audit trail (FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the Audit Trail”) and the management of the audit
events (FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the Audit Events”). Audit trail management is supported by the requirements
for the audit review (FAU_SAR.1, FAU_SAR.2 and FAU_SAR.3) as well as the requirements for the protection of
the audit trail (FAU_STG.1, FAU_STG.3 and FAU_STG.4). Management of the audit events is supported by the
ability to select the events to be audited (FAU_SEL.1). In addition the TOE supports roles which is expressed by
FMT_SMR.2 and FMT_MTD.1 “Management of Roles”.
Security management also comprises the management of a reliable time stamps. Such time stamps are essential for
correct time information within audit records. Times stamps are addressed by FPT_STM.1.
TSF Protection
The configuration of TSF trusted databases is covered by FMT_MSA.3, FMT_MTD.1 (Management of User
Attributes; Authentication Data; and Roles), FMT_SMR.2, FMT_SMF.1, and FMT_MTD.3.
The TOE also needs to provide tools that allow the administrator to check the integrity of the underlying hardware and
the correct operation of the TSF. Such abilities are addressed by FPT_AMT.1 and FPT_TST.1.
The TOE needs to enter a secure state when critical security functions fail, and allow the administrator to perform
repairs and re-enter the normal operating mode. This is expressed with the security requirements FPT_FLS.1,
FPT_RCV.1, and FPT_RCV.4,.
6.4.2 Security Requirements Coverage
The following table shows that each security functional requirement addresses at least one objective.
Table 6-2: Mapping Security Functional Requirements to Objectives
SFR Objectives
FAU_GEN.1 O.AUDITING
FAU_GEN.1 O.AUDITING
FAU_SAR.1 O.AUDITING
FAU_SAR.2 O.AUDITING
FAU_SAR.3 O.AUDITING
FAU_SEL.1 O.AUDITING
FAU_STG.1 O.AUDITING
FAU_STG.3 O.AUDITING
FAU_STG.4 O.AUDITING
FCS_CKM.1(1) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.1(2) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.1(3) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.2(1) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.2(2) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.2(3) O.COMPROT
FCS_CKM.2(4) O.COMPROT
FCS_COP.1(1) O.COMPROT
FCS_COP.1(2) O.COMPROT
FCS_COP.1(3) O.COMPROT
FDP_ACC.1(1) O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS
FDP_ACF.1(1) O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS
FDP_ACC.1(2) O.ROLE
FDP_ACF.1(2) O.ROLE
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 57 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
SFR Objectives
FDP_ETC.1 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_ETC.2 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_IFC.1 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_IFF.2 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_ITC.1 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_ITC.2 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FDP_RIP.2 O.RESIDUAL_INFO
Note 1 O.RESIDUAL_INFO
FDP_UCT.1 O.COMPROT
FDP_UIT.1 O.COMPROT
FIA_ATD.1 O.AUTHORIZATION, O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS,
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS, O.ROLE
FIA_SOS.1 O.AUTHORIZATION
FIA_UAU.2 O.AUTHORIZATION
FIA_UAU.7 O.AUTHORIZATION
FIA_UID.2 O.AUTHORIZATION
FIA_USB.1 O.AUTHORIZATION, O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS,
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS, O.ROLE
FMT_MSA.1(1) O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.1(2) O.MANDATORY_ACCESS, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.1(3) O.ROLE, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.1(4) O.ROLE, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.1(5) O.ROLE, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.1(6) O.ROLE, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.2 O.AUTHORIZATION, O.COMPROT
FMT_MSA.3(1) O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.3(2) O.MANDATORY_ACCESS, O.MANAGE
FMT_MSA.3(3) O.ROLE, O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
Audit Trail
O.AUDITING, O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
Audited Events
O.AUDITING, O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
User Attributes
O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
Authentication Data
O.AUTHORIZATION, O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
Initialization of
Authentication Data
O.MANAGE
FMT_MTD.1
Management of
Roles
O.MANAGE, O.HIERARCHICAL
FMT_MTD.3 O.AUTHORIZATION
FMT_REV.1
User Attributes
O.MANAGE
FMT_REV.1
Object Attributes
O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS, O.MANDATORY_ACCESS, O.ROLE,
O.MANAGE
FMT_SMF.1 O.MANAGE
FMT_SMR.2 O.MANAGE, O.AUDITING, O.DUTY, O.ROLE
FPT_AMT.1 O.ENFORCEMENT
FPT_FLS.1 O.ENFORCEMENT
FPT_RCV.1 O.MANAGE
FPT_RCV.4 O.MANAGE
FPT_STM.1 O.AUDITING
FPT_TDC.1 O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
FPT_TST.1 O.ENFORCEMENT
FTA_LSA.1 O.AUTHORIZATION
FTA_TSE.1 O.AUTHORIZATION
FTP_ITC.1 O.COMPROT
O.AUTHORIZATION
Page 58 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The TSF must ensure that only authorized users gain access to the TOE and its resources. Users authorized to access
the TOE have to use an identification and authentication process [FIA_UID.2, FIA_UAU.2]. To ensure authorized
access to the TOE, authentication data is protected [FIA_ATD.1, FIA_UAU.7, FMT_MTD.1 "Management of
Authentication Data"]. The strength of the authentication mechanism must be sufficient to ensure that unauthorized
users can not easily impersonate an authorized user [FIA_SOS.1, FMT_MSA.2]. Proper authorization for subjects
acting on behalf of users is also ensured [FIA_USB.1].
Limitations on establishing user sessions must be defined and enforced [FTA_LSA.1, FTA_TSE.1].
The password quality checking mechanism enforces that only secure values are accepted for TSF data [FMT_MTD.3]
O.DISCRETIONARY_ACCESS
The TSF must control access to resources based on identity of users. The TSF must allow authorized users to specify
which resources may be accessed by which users.
Discretionary access control must have a defined scope of control [FDP_ACC.1(1)]. The rules of the DAC policy
must be defined [FDP_ACF.1(1)]. The security attributes of objects used to enforce the DAC policy must be defined.
The security attributes of subjects used to enforce the DAC policy must be defined [FIA_ATD.1, FIA_USB.1].
Authorized users must be able to control who has access to objects [FMT_MSA.1(1)] and be able to revoke that
access [FMT_REV.1 "Revocation of Object Attributes"]. Protection of named objects must be continuous, starting
from object creation [FMT_MSA.3(1)].
O.AUDITING
The events to be audited must be defined [FAU_GEN.1], and must be associated with the identity of the user that
caused the event [FAU_GEN.2]. An authorized administrator must be able to read the audit records [FAU_SAR.1],
but other users must not be able to read audit information [FAU_SAR.2]. The administrative user must be able to
search the audit events in the audit trail using defined criteria [FAU_SAR.3] and also must be able to define the events
that are audited and the conditions under which they are audited [FAU_SEL.1]. All audit records must be provided
with a reliable time stamp [FPT_STM.1]. The audit system must ensure that audit records are not deleted or modified
[FAU_STG.1] and are not lost because of shortage of resources [FAU_STG.3 and FAU_STG.4]. The administrative
user must be able to manage the audit trail [FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the audit trail”] and the audit events
[FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the audit events”]. The enforcement of role separation [FMT_SMR.2] ensures that
audit data can be reliably mapped to security relevant actions.
O.RESIDUAL_INFO
The TSF must ensure that any information contained in a protected resource is not released when the resource is
recycled.
Residual information associated with defined objects in the TOE must be purged prior to the reuse of the object
containing the residual information [FDP_RIP.2] and before a resource is given to a subject [Note 1].
O.MANAGE
The TSF must provide all the functions and facilities necessary to support the administrative users that are responsible
for the management of TOE security.
Aspects that need to be managed must be defined [FMT_SMF.1]. The TSF must provide for an administrative user to
manage the TOE [FMT_SMR.2]. The administrative user must be able to administer the audit subsystem
[FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the Audit Trail” and FMT_MTD.1 “Management of the Audit Events”] and user
accounts [FMT_MTD.1 "Management of User Attributes", FMT_MTD.1 "Management of Authentication Data",
FMT_REV.1 "Revocation of User Attributes", FMT_MTD.1 “Role management” ] and object attributes
[FMT_MSA.1, FMT_REV.1 "Revocation of Object Attributes"]. In addition the default values for access control need
to be defined [FMT_MSA.3]. A mechanism for exchange of labeled data among systems must be defined
[FPT_TDC.1].
O.ENFORCEMENT
The TSF must be designed and implemented in a manner which ensures that the organizational policies are enforced
in the target environment.
The TSF must provide the administrator with tools that allow checking the integrity of the underlying hardware
[FPT_AMT.1], a self test utility [FPT_TST.1] and support entering a fail secure mode on critical errors [FPT_FLS.1].
This objective provides global support to other security objectives for the TOE by protecting the parts of the TOE
which implement policies and ensures that policies are enforced.
O.COMPROT
The TSF must be able to establish an Inter-TSF trusted channel between itself and another trusted IT product
[FTP_ITC.1] protecting the user data transferred from disclosure [FDP_UCT.1] and undetected modification
[FDP_UIT.1]. This TSF uses cryptographic functions in the implementation that require securely generating keys
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 59 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
[FCS_CKM.1], distributing keys [FCS_CKM.2] and performing the required cryptographic operations on the user
data [FCS_COP.1]. Keys used must be secure enough such that they can not be guessed [FMT_MSA.2]
O.MANDATORY_ACCESS
The TSF must control access to resources based on the sensitivity labels of subjects and objects. The TSF must allow
authorized users to specify which resources may be accessed by which users.
Rules for the import and export of labeled and unlabeled user data must be defined [FDP_ETC.1, FDP_ETC.2,
FDP_ITC.1, FDP_ITC.2, FPT_TDC.1].
Mandatory access control must have a defined scope of control [FDP_IFC.1]. The rules of the MAC policy must be
defined [FDP_IFF.1]. The security attributes of objects used to enforce the MAC policy must be defined. The security
attributes of subjects used to enforce the MAC policy must be defined [FIA_ATD.1, FIA_USB.1]. Authorized users
must be able to control who has access to objects [FMT_MSA.1(2)] and be able to revoke that access [FMT_REV.1
"Revocation of Object Attributes"]. Protection of named objects must be continuous, starting from object creation
[FMT_MSA.3(2)].
O.DUTY
The TOE must provide the capability of enforcing ‘separation of duties’. The enforcement of role separation
[FMT_SMR.2] supports this objective.
O.HIERARCHICAL
The TOE must provide the capability of defining hierarchical roles as required by [FMT_MTD.1].
O.ROLE
The TOE must prevent users from gaining access to and performing operations on its resources/objects unless they
have been granted access by the resource/object owner or they have been assigned to a role (by an authorized
administrator) which permits those operations [FMT_SMR.2].
Role based access control must have a defined scope of control [FDP_ACC.1(2)]. The rules of the RBAC policy must
be defined [FDP_ACF.1(2)]. The security attributes of objects used to enforce the RBAC policy must be defined. The
security attributes of subjects used to enforce the RBAC policy must be defined [FIA_ATD.1, FIA_USB.1].
Authorized users must be able to control who has access to objects [FMT_MSA.1(3,4,5,6)] and be able to revoke that
access [FMT_REV.1 "Revocation of Object Attributes"]. Protection of named objects must be continuous, starting
from object creation [FMT_MSA.3(3)].
Page 60 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
6.4.3 Security Requirements Dependency Analysis
The following table shows the dependencies between the different security functional requirements and if they are
resolved in this Security Target.
Table 6-3: Dependencies between Security Functional Requirements
Security
Functional
Requirement
Dependencies Resolved
FAU_GEN.1 FPT_STM.1 Reliable time stamps Yes
FAU_GEN.2 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation
FIA_UID.1 Timing of identification
Yes
FAU_SAR.1 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation Yes
FAU_SAR.2 FAU_SAR.1 Audit review Yes
FAU_SAR.3 FAU_SAR.1 Audit review Yes
FAU_SEL.1 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation
FMT_MTD.1 Management of TSF data
Yes
FAU_STG.1 FAU_GEN.1 Audit data generation Yes
FAU_STG.3 FAU_STG.1 Protected audit trail storage Yes
FAU_STG.4 FAU_STG.1 Protected audit trail storage Yes
FCS_CKM.1 [FCS_CKM.2 Cryptographic key distribution
or
FCS_COP.1 Cryptographic operation]
FCS_CKM.4 Cryptographic key destruction
FMT_MSA.2 Secure security attributes
No (see
comment below)
FCS_CKM.2 [FDP_ITC.1 Import of user data without security attributes
or
FCS_CKM.1 Cryptographic key generation]
FCS_CKM.4 Cryptographic key destruction
FMT_MSA.2 Secure security attributes
No (see
comment
below)
FCS_COP.1 [FDP_ITC.1 Import of user data without security attributes
or
FCS_CKM.1 Cryptographic key generation]
FCS_CKM.4 Cryptographic key destruction
FMT_MSA.2 Secure security attributes
No (see
comment
below)
FDP_ACC.1(1) FDP_ACF.1 Security attribute based access control Yes
FDP_ACF.1(1) FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control
FMT_MSA.3 Static attribute initialisation
Yes
FDP_ACC.1(2) FDP_ACF.1 Security attribute based access control Yes
FDP_ACF.1(2) FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control
FMT_MSA.3 Static attribute initialisation
Yes
FDP_ETC.1 FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control Yes
FDP_ETC.2 FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control Yes
FDP_IFC.1 FDP_IFF.1 Simple security attributes Yes
FDP_IFF.2 FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control Yes
FDP_ITC.1 [FDP_ACC.1 or FDP_IFC.1]
FMT_MSA.3
Yes
FDP_ITC.2 [FDP_ACC.1, or FDP_IFC.1]
[FTP_ITC.1, or FTP_TRP.1]
FPT_TDC.1
Yes
FDP_RIP.2 No dependencies. Yes
Note 1 No dependencies Yes
FDP_UCT.1 [FTP_ITC.1 Inter-TSF trusted channel, or
FTP_TRP.1 Trusted path]
[FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control, or
FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control]
yes
(FTP_ITC.1 and
FDP_ACC.1)
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 61 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Security
Functional
Requirement
Dependencies Resolved
FDP_UIT.1 [FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control, or
FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control]
[FTP_ITC.1 Inter-TSF trusted channel, or
FTP_TRP.1 Trusted path]
yes
(FTP_ITC.1 and
FDP_ACC.1)
FIA_ATD.1 No dependencies Yes
FIA_SOS.1 No dependencies Yes
FIA_UAU.2 FIA_UID.1 Timing of identification Yes
FIA_UAU.7 FIA_UAU.1 Timing of authentication Yes
FIA_UID.2 No dependencies Yes
FIA_USB.1 FIA_ATD.1 User attribute definition Yes
FMT_MSA.1 [FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control or
FDP_IFC.1 Subset information flow control]
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MSA.2 [FDP_ACC.1 Subset access control or
FDP_IFC.1 Subset infromation flow control]
FMT_MSA.1 Management of security attributes
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
Yes
FMT_MSA.3 FMT_MSA.1 Management of security attributes
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
Audit Trail
FMT_SMR.1 Security Roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
Audit Events
FMT_SMR.1 Security Roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
User Attributes
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
Authentication
Data
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
Initialization of
Authentication
Data
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.1
Management of
Roles
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles
FMT_SMF.1 Specification of management functions
Yes
FMT_MTD.3 FMT_MTD.1 Yes
FMT_REV.1
User Attributes
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles Yes
FMT_REV.1
Object Attributes
FMT_SMR.1 Security roles Yes
FMT_SMF.1 No dependencies Yes
FMT_SMR.2 FIA_UID.1 Timing of identification Yes
FPT_AMT.1 No dependencies Yes
FPT_FLS.1 No dependencies Yes
FPT_RCV.1 AGD_OPE.1 Yes
FPT_RCV.4 No dependencies Yes
FPT_STM.1 No dependencies Yes
Page 62 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Security
Functional
Requirement
Dependencies Resolved
FPT_TDC.1 No dependencies Yes
FPT_TST.1 FPT_AMT.1 Yes
FTA_LSA.1 No dependencies Yes
FTA_TSE.1 No dependencies Yes
FTP_ITC.1 No dependencies Yes
Comment
The security functional requirements FCS_CKM.1, FCS_CKM.2 and FCS_COP.1 all have a dependency on
FCS_CKM.4 (Cryptographic key destruction). The TOE does not explicitly implement a key destruction function.
Key destruction is performed implicitly for the symmetric session keys used by the Object Reuse function, which
ensures that memory used to temporarily store the symmetric session key is cleared before it is assigned to another
subject or object. This applies for both main memory as well as disk space (the session keys might be written to disk
space as part of the paging function of the TOE. They are not stored in ordinary files).
With respect to the long-term public-private key pairs, the key destruction is performed by deleting the file containing
the key. The Object Reuse function of the TOE ensures that the disk space previously allocated to the file storing those
keys is cleared before it is assigned to another subject or object.
The other dependencies of those security functional requirements are satisfied. The TOE does not import keys but
generates all keys themselves as expressed in the security functional requirement FCS_CKM.1
Remarks
The dependencies on FIA_UID.1 are resolved with the inclusion of FIA_UID.2 which is hierarchical to FIA_UID.1
The dependencies on FMT_SMR.1 are resolved with the inclusion of FMT_SMR.2 which is hierarchical to
FMT_SMR.1.
The dependencies on FDP_IFF.1 are resolved with the inclusion of FDP_IFF.2 which is hierarchical to FDP_IFF.1.
The dependencies of FMT_MSA.1 and FMT_MSA.3 on FMT_SMF.1 were introduced by [CC] and have been
considered here.
The multiple instantiations of FDP_ACC.1, FDP_ACF.1, FMT_MSA.1, FMT_MSA.3, FMT_MTD.1, and
FMT_REV.1 have been included in this table, since a multiple instantiation of one security functional requirement
may in some cases result in the requirement for multiple instantiations of depending requirements.
This table shows that no unresolved dependencies exist between security functional requirements.
There are also no unresolved dependencies between security assurance requirements. This is because the evaluation
assurance level EAL4 has been defined such that no unresolved dependencies exist. The additional assurance
component ALC_FLR.3 has no dependencies and therefore there are no unresolved dependencies for assurance
components.
6.5 TOE Security Assurance Requirements
The target evaluation assurance level for the product is EAL4 [CC] augmented by ALC_FLR.3., which is seen
appropriate for a controlled environment where attackers only have a low attack potential.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 63 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7 TOE Summary Specification
7.1 Security Enforcing Components Overview
7.1.1 Introduction
This chapter describes the security functions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux that are subject to this evaluation. A large
subset of the overall security related functions of Red Hat Enterprise Linux has been included in this evaluation.
Those functions provide the basic security for a server within a protected environment. They allow for identification
and authentication of users, access control to files and IPC objects, auditing of security critical events and the secure
communication with other trusted systems. The TOE protects the security functions from unauthorized tampering and
bypassing and allows only administrative users to manage the security functions. Normal users are only allowed to
manage access control rights of the file system and IPC objects they own and to modify their own password in
accordance with the password rules enforced by the TOE. Those functions are required as a basis for application level
security functions and mechanisms and can be used to build application specific security policies.
The TOE can be operated in two different modes: “LSPP mode” and “CAPP mode”. When in CAPP mode the TOE
provides security functions very similar to those that have been evaluated with the previous version of the TOE (Red
Hat Enterprise Linux Version 4). In LSPP mode the TOE has activated the SELinux MLS security module, which
provides mandatory access control, and is also compliant with the requirements of the role-based access control model
requirements as defined in [RBACPP].
The two modes of operation differ by the configuration of the SELinux security module. In addition the TOE requires
use of trusted programs appropriate for each of the two different modes. The specific differences are documented in
the Evaluated Configuration Guide [ECG].
7.1.2 Kernel Services
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux kernel includes the base kernel and some kernel modules. The base kernel includes
support for system initialization, memory management, file and I/O management, process control, and Inter-Process
Communications (IPC) services. Kernel modules are dynamically loadable modules that the kernel will load on
demand and that execute with kernel privileges.
Device drivers may be implemented as kernel modules.
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux kernel implements a virtual memory manager (VMM) that allocates a large, contiguous
address space to each process running on the system. This address space is spread across physical memory and paging
space on a secondary storage device.
The process management component includes the software that is responsible for creating, scheduling, and
terminating processes and process threads. Process management allows multiple processes to exist simultaneously on
a computer and to share usage of the computer’s processor(s). A process is defined as a program in execution, that is,
it consists of the program and the execution state of the program.
Process management also provides services such as inter-process communications (IPC) and event notification. The
base kernel implements
 named pipes
 unnamed pipes
 signals
 SYSV semaphores
 SYSV shared memory
 SYSV message queues
 POSIX message queues
 Internet domain sockets
 UNIX domain sockets
The file and I/O software provides access to files and devices. The Red Hat Enterprise Linux Virtual File System
(VFS) provides a consistent view of multiple physical file system implementations.
Section 1.5.2.1 of this document lists the file system included in the evaluated configuration.
Page 64 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Ext3 and ISO-9660 represent file systems on a physical medium (disk (ext3), CDROM (ISO-9660)), and the tmpfs
file system provides nonpersistent file storage in system RAM.
The other supported file systems do not represent or provide physical data storage file systems but are used as a
configuration and monitoring interface to the kernel, provided by the kernel only in a running system.
7.1.3 Non-Kernel TSF Services
The non-kernel TSF services are:
 Identification and Authentication services
 Network application layer services
 Configuration and management commands requiring special privileges
Those services support the security functions implemented within the kernel and use the kernel interface for this
purpose, but they are not running themselves in kernel mode. Those functions are included in the TSF as far as they
are required for the security services of the TOE (Identification and Authentication services), while other services that
are implemented as tools or commands for the use of the administrative user and where the kernel prohibits the use
misuse of those tools or commands since they use kernel functions restricted to administrative users and attempted use
by normal users is prohibited by the kernel.
7.1.4 Network Services
The TOE is capable of providing the following types of services:
 Local services to the user currently logged in to the local computer console.
 Local services to previous users via deferred jobs.
 Local services to users who have accessed the local host via the network using protocols such as ftp or ssh.
 Network services to clients on either the local host or on remote hosts.
Network services are provided to clients via a client-server architecture. This client-server architecture refers to the
division of the software that provides a service into a client portion, which makes requests, and a server portion,
which carries out client requests (usually on a different computer). A service protocol acts as the interface between the
client and server.
The primary low-level protocols are Internet Protocol (IP), Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), and User Datagram
Protocol (UDP). IP is not user visible, but non-TSF processes may communicate with other hosts in a networked
system using a reliable byte stream or unreliable datagrams, TCP and UDP respectively.
The higher-level network services that are part of the TSF are built on TCP or UDP. The TCP based application
protocols supporting user authentication and running on privileged ports are:
 secure shell (SSH v2.0)
 file transfer services (FTP)
In addition the TOE supports secure socket layer (SSL v3) protocol with the stunnel program, which can be used to
securely tunnel higher layer protocols. This service is provided by a trusted process which can be used by applications
to tunnel TCP based protocols using a single port. The tunnel actually provides the certificate based authentication of
the server side of the tunnel and the confidentiality and integrity protection of the communication.
7.1.5 Security Policy Overview
The TOE is a single Red Hat Enterprise Linux system running on one machine. Several of those systems may be
interconnected via a local area network and exchange information using the network services. But one should keep in
mind that the following statements hold:
 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux kernel is running on each computer in the networked system.
 Identification and authentication (I&A) is performed locally by each computer. Each user is required to
Login with a valid password and user identifier combination at the local system and also at any remote
computer where the user can enter commands to a shell program (using ssh) or use ftp. User ID and
password for one human user may be different on different hosts. User ID and password on one host system
are not known to other host systems on the network and therefore a user ID is relevant only for the host
where it it defined.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 65 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 Discretionary access control (DAC), role-based access control and mandatory access control (when operated
in LSPP mode) is performed locally by each of the host computers and is based on user identity, group
membership, user roles and the object attraibute on this host. Each process has an identity (the user on whose
behalf it is operating), belongs to one or more groups and operates with a role. All named objects have an
owning user, an owning group, DAC attributes, which is a set of permission bits. In addition, file system
objects optionally have extended permissions also known as an Access Control List (ACL). The ACL
mechanism is a significant enhancement beyond traditional UNIX systems, and permits control of access
based on lists of users and/or groups to whom specific permissions may be individually granted or denied.
 When operated in LSPP mode, Role-based access control (RBAC) is implemented as part of the SELinux
policy. This allows defining a set of roles that can be assigned to users and a set of domains a user in a role
can switch to. The TOE includes a policy that defines a hierarchical set of roles with general system
administration, security administration and audit configuration assigned to different roles.
 When operated in LSPP mode, the security context assigned to each object and process also contains the
sensitivity label of the object or process. Processes get a security context from the user that initiated them. On
every access of a process to a protected resource the TOE will evaluate the sensitivity labels of the subject
and the object and check if access is allowed according to the rules of the mandatory access control.
 Object reuse is performed locally, without respect to other hosts.
 Interrupt handling is performed locally, without respect to other hosts.
 Privilege is based on the user identity and user role.
7.1.6 TSF Structure
The TSF is the portion of the system that is responsible for enforcing the system’s security policy. The TSF of Red
Hat Enterprise Linux consists of two major components: kernel software and trusted processes. All these components
must operate correctly for the system to be trusted. Those functions are supported by the mechanisms of the
underlying hardware which are used to protect the TSF from tampering by untrusted processes.
The hardware platforms Red Hat Enterprise Linux is running on support two execution states where kernel mode or
supervisor state, software runs with specific privileges to perform operations on the underlying hardware platform
and user mode or problem state software runs without those privileges. Red Hat Enterprise Linux also provides two
types of memory protection: segmentation and page protection. The memory protection features isolate critical parts
of the kernel from user processes and ensure that segments in use by one process are not available to other processes.
The two-state architecture and the memory protections form the basis of the argument for process isolation and
protection of the TSF.
The trusted processes include programs such as Linux administrative programs, scripts, shells, and standard Linux
utilities that run with administrative privilege, as a consequence of being invoked by a user with administrative
privileges. Non-kernel TSF software also includes daemons that provide system services, such as networking, as well
as setuid and setgid programs that can be executed by untrusted users.
7.1.7 TSF Interfaces
Each subsection here summarizes a class of interfaces in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system, and
characterizes them in terms of the TSF boundary. The TSF boundary includes some interfaces, such as commands
implemented by privileged processes, which are similar in style to other interfaces that are not part of the TSF
boundary and thus not trusted. Some interfaces are part of the TSF boundary only when used in a privileged
environment, such as an administrative user’s process, but not when used in a non-privileged environment, such as a
normal user process. All interface classes are described in further detail in the next chapter, and the mechanisms in
subsequent chapters.As this is only an introduction, no explicit forward references are provided.
7.1.7.1 User Interfaces
The typical interface presented to a user is the command interpreter, or shell. The user types commands to the
interpreter, and in turn, the interpreter invokes programs. The programs execute hardware instructions and invoke the
kernel to perform services, such as file access or I/O to the user’s terminal. A program may also invoke other
programs, or request services using an IPC mechanism. Before using the command interpreter, a user must log in.
The command interpreter or shell as well as other programs operating on behalf of a user have the following
interfaces:
 CPU instructions, which a process uses to perform computations within the processor’s registers and a
process’s memory areas. CPU instructions are interpreted by the hardware, which is part of the TOE. CPU
instructions are therefore an interface to the TSF.
Page 66 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 System calls (e.g. open, fork), through which a process requests services from the kernel. They are invoked
using a special CPU instruction. System calls are the primary way for a program operating on behalf of a
user to request services of the TOE including the security services. System calls related to security functions
are therefore part of the TSF interface.
 Directly-invoked trusted processes (e.g. passwd) which perform higher-level services, and are invoked with
an exec system call that names an appropriate program which is part of the TSF, and replaces the current
process’s content with it; a limited number of those processes exist that perform security functions and are
therefore part of the TSF interface.
 Daemons, which accept requests stored in files or communicated via IPC mechanisms, are generally created
through use of directly invoked processes (some trusted, some untrusted). A few daemons perform security
functions and therefore are part of the TSF interface.
 Network Services, (ssh, ftp, stunnel using ssl, IPsec). The network services interface operates at many
different levels of abstraction. At the highest level, it provides a means for users on one host to request a
virtual terminal connection on another host within the system. At a lower level, it allows a host on a
networked system to request a specific service from another host within the system on behalf of a user.
Examples of requested services include remotely login into the TOE and obtaining a shell or transferring
whole files. At the lowest level, it allows a subject on one host in the system to request a connection (i.e.
TCP), or deliver data (i.e. UDP) to a listening subject on another system. Network services usually consist of
a client on the requestor’s side and a server (usually a daemon) running on the server’s side. Authentication
(if required by the service) and access control use dedicated interfaces to the functions on the server side
which are therefore part of the TSF interface. Note that for the TOE only IPsec, ssh, stunnel and ftp are seen
as TSF, because they use privileged ports. ssh and ftp require user identification and authentication, and ssh
and stunnel provide confidentiality and integrity protection.
Note: Users may start programs using unprivileged ports, but those programs operate with the effective and
filesystem userid of the calling user and are therefore restricted by the security policy of the TOE. Those user
programs using unprivileged ports are not part of the TSF.
7.1.7.2 Operation and Administrator Interface
The primary administrative interfaces to Red Hat Enterprise Linux are the same as the interfaces for ordinary users;
the administrative user logs into the system with a standard, untrusted, identity and password, and after assuming the
root identity uses standard Linux commands to perform administrative tasks. Direct root login is only allowed from
the system console (direct login at the system console is allowed to avoid a specific denial of service attack).
The part of the administrative database (which is the set of all security relevant configuration files) that is used to
configure and manage the TSF is seen as part of the TSF interface. The files in the administrative database are
protected by the different access control mechanisms of the TOE. It is therefore very important to set the access rights
and security context to the files of the administrative database such that users in non-administrative roles are
prohibited from modifying those files and have read access on a need to know basis only. Note that each server in the
system has its own administrative database and if synchronization between those TSF databases is required by the
organization’s security policy, it has to be done manually in the system environment. The TOE does not provide any
function to synchronize TSF databases on different systems. In the TOE administrative tasks are assigned to defined
roles allowing a finer grained administrative model based on the role(s) of a user.
7.1.8 Secure and Non-Secure States
The secure state for the Red Hat Enterprise Linux is defined as a host’s entry into multi-user mode with the
administrative databases configured with the required access rights. At this point, the host accepts user logins and
services network requests across the networked system. If these facilities are not available, the host is considered to be
in a non-secure state. Although it may be operational in a limited sense and available for an administrative user to
perform system repair, maintenance, and diagnostic activity, the TSF are not in full operation and are not necessarily
protecting all system resources according to the security policy.
7.2 Description of the Security Enforcing Functions
7.2.1 Introduction
This chapter describes how the Security Enforcing components of the TOE provide the Security Requirements
identified in chapter 5.
A high level description is provided for each group of security enforcing functions (SEF) providing a common feature
or service, and stating how the functionality specified by the security enforcing function group is provided by the
security enforcing components identified in this Chapter.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 67 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The security enforcing function groups identified in this chapter follow the description given in chapter 2:
 Identification and Authentication
 Audit
 Discretionary Access Control
 Mandatory Access Control (in LSPP mode)
 Role-based Access Control (in LSPP mode)
 Object Reuse
 Security Management
 Secure Communication
 TOE Protection
The TOE security functions (TSF) are described with sufficient detail to provide a general understanding of those
functions and how they work. A more detailed description of those functions and a mapping of the TSF to TOE
subsystems is provided in the high level design documentation.
References to components given in italics can be traced to manual pages or TOE sources for further information.
Note also that some commands initiate trusted processes or are a local front end to a trusted process (e.g. ftp and the
ftpd daemon, ssh and the sshd daemon). In these instances, a generic reference to the command is made.
7.2.2 Identification and Authentication (IA)
User identification and authentication in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux includes all forms of interactive login (e.g.,
using the ssh or ftp protocols) as well as identity changes through the su command. These all rely on explicit
authentication information provided interactively by a user.
Identification and authentication of users is performed from a terminal where no user is logged on or when a user that
is logged on starts a service that requires additional authentication. All those services use a common mechanism for
authentication described in this chapter. They all use the administrative database. The administrative database is
managed by administrative users, but normal users are allowed to modify their own password using the passwd
command. This chapter also describes the authentication process for those network services that require
authentication.
Linux uses a suite of libraries called the „Pluggable Authentication Modules” (PAM) that allow an administrative user
to choose how PAM-aware applications authenticate users. The following PAM modules are included in the evaluated
configuration and implement security functions:
 pam_unix.so (basic password based authentication, configured to use MD5)
 pam_loginuid.so (set permanent audit login user ID, and ensure fail-secure behavior by refusing login in
case the audit system is inoperative)
 pam_wheel.so (to restrict the use of the su command to members of the wheel group)
 pam_tally2.so (to limit the number of consecutive unsuccessful authentication attempts)
 pam_nologin.so (to check /etc/nologin)
 pam_securetty.so (to restrict root access to specific terminals)
 pam_passwdqc.so (for additional password checking)
 pam_selinux.so (to set the default security context when establishing a session. When an application opens
a session using pam_selinux.so, the shell that gets executed will be run in the default security context. The
module modifies the security context of the controlling tty to match the one of the user.)
 pam_namespace.so (to establish a private namespace with polyinstantiated directories when establishing a
session. Polyinstantiated directories are needed to achieve greater information separation for public use
directories such as /tmp and /var/tmp, and provide users with writeable home directories as they transition
roles, types or sensitivity labels.)
In addition the following module may be used:
 pam_rootok.so (to avoid that an administrative user with the effective user ID of root has to re-enter the
password)
Page 68 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.2.1 User Identification and Authentication Data Management (IA.1)
Each server maintains its own set of users with their passwords and attributes. Although the same human user may
have accounts on different servers interconnected by a network and running an instantiation of the TOE, those
accounts and their parameter are not synchronized on different servers. As a result the same user may have different
usernames, different user Ids, different passwords and different attributes on different machines within the networked
environment. Existing mechanism for synchronizing this within the whole networked system are not subject to this
evaluation.
Each machine within the network maintains its own administrative database by making all administrative changes on
the local machine. System administration has to ensure that all machines within the network are configured in
accordance with the requirements defined in this Security Target.
Users are allowed to change their passwords by using the passwd command, which is a setuid program with the
owning userid of 0. This configuration allows a process running the passwd program to read the contents of
/etc/shadow and to modify the /etc/shadow file for the user’s password entry, which would ordinarily be inaccessible
to a non-privileged user process (IA1.1). Users are also warned to change their passwords at login time if the
password will expire soon, and are prevented from logging in if the password has expired (IA1.2).
The file /etc/passwd contains the user’s name, the id of the user, an indicator, if the password of the user is valid, the
principal group id of the user and other (not security relevant) information (IA1.3). The encrypted password of the
user itself is not stored in this file but in the file /etc/shadow which can be protected against read access for ordinary
users. This prohibits dictionary attacks on passwords in the passwd file as for example described in the paper of Ken
Thomson and Bob Morris „Password Security – A Case History”.
The file /etc/shadow contains the MD5 encrypted password, the userid, the time the password was last changed and
some other information that are not subject to the security functions as defined in this Security Target (IA1.4).
For a complete list of user attributes see the description of the function SM.
An administrative user can define the following restrictions on the login process (defined in /etc/login.defs to be used
by management tools; in the PAM configuration and the trusted databases /etc/shadow and /etc/security/opasswd to
be used by the authentication process itself):
 Maximum number of days a password may be used.
 Minimum number of days allowed between password changes.
 Minimum acceptable password length (defined in the parameter to pam_passwdqc.so).
 Number of days a warning is given before a password expires.
 Number of consecutive unsuccessful login retries.
 Number of old but recent passwords to be disallowed when changing the password for a user (password
history)
This allows the administrative user to define restrictions on authentication data such as the minimum length of the
password, checking the password against entries in a dictionary as well as the maximum life time of a password, the
number of unsuccessful login attempts allowed before the account is locked (IA1.5). Those restrictions are stored in
the file /etc/login.defs, /etc/shadow and in the PAM configuration. The administrative user can use those parameters
to define a password policy such that the passwords satisfy the requirements defined in FIA_SOS.1.
The time of the last successful logins is recorded in the /var/log/lastlog file (IA1.6).
In the evaluated configuration the above mentioned parameter need to be set in accordance with the following
restrictions:
 Maximum lifetime of a password: less than or equal to 60 days
 Minimum lifetime of a password: 1 day
 Minimum length of a password: 8 character
 Number of days a warning is given before password expires: 7 days
 Number of consecutive unsuccessful login retries: 5
 Maximum number of attempts to change the password: 3
 Password history length: 7
(IA1.7)
When operated in LSPP mode the login mechanism assigns a default sensitivity label for the session. This sensitivity
label must be dominated by the clearance of the user (IA1.8). In the case of network login via ssh, the label of the
network connection must match the sensitivity label of the session (IA1.9).
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 69 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
When operated in LSPP mode, the login mechanism assigns a default role for the session from the list of roles
assigned to the user by using the newrole –r command (IA1.10).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FIA_ATD.1, FIA_SOS.1, FMT_MTD.1 „User
Attributes”, FMT_MTD.3, and FMT_SMF.1.
7.2.2.2 Common Authentication Mechanism (IA.2)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux includes a common authentication mechanism which is a subroutine used for all activities
that create a user session, including all the interactive login activities, batch jobs, and authentication for the SU
command (IA2.1).
The common mechanism includes the following checks and operations:
 Check password authentication
 Check password expiration
 Check whether access should be denied due to too many consecutive authentication failures
 Get user security characteristics (e.g., user and groups)
 Check if the sensitivity label specified by the user for the session is within the range of the sensitivity labels
allowed for this user (in LSPP mode only)
 Check if the role specified for the session is within the set of roles assigned to the user (in LSPP mode only)
The common I&A mechanism identifies the user based on the supplied user name, gets that user’s security attributes,
and performs authentication against the user’s password.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FIA_UAU.2 and FIA_UID.2.
7.2.2.3 Interactive Login and Related Mechanisms (IA.3)
The ssh and ftp as well as the su command used to change the real, filesystem and effective user ID of a user all use
the same authentication mechanism in the evaluated configuration (IA3.1). It is of course up to the remote system to
protect the user’s entry of a password correctly (e. g. provide only obscured feedback). As long as the remote system
is also an evaluated version of the TOE, this is ensured by the security function of the TOE.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FIA_UAU.2, FIA_UID.2 and FIA_UAU.7.
7.2.2.4 User Identity and Role Changing (IA.4)
Users can change their identity (i.e., switch to another identity) using the su command (IA4.1). When switching
identities, the real, filesystem and effective user ID and real, filesystem and effective group ID are changed to the one
of the user specified in the command (after successful authentication as this user) (IA4.2).
The primary use of the su command within the Red Hat Enterprise Linux is to allow appropriately authorized
individuals the ability to assume the root identity to perform administrative actions. In this system the capability to
login as the root identity has been restricted to defined terminals only (IA4.3). In addition the use of the su command
to switch to root has been restricted to users belonging to the wheel group (IA4.4). Users that don’t have access to a
terminal where root login is allowed and are not member of the wheel group will not be able to switch their real,
filesystem and effective user ID to root even if they would know the authentication information for root. Note that
when a user executes a program that has the setuid bit set only the effective user ID and filesystem ID are changed to
that of the owner of the file containing the program while the real user ID remains that of the caller (IA4.5). The login
ID is neither changed by the su command nor by executing a program that has the setuid or setgid bit set (IA4.6).
The su command invokes the common authentication mechanism to validate the supplied authentication.
A user can change his current active role using the newrole -r command (IA.4.7). The command requires the user to
authenticate himself and allows to change his role to one of the roles assigned to him after successful authentication
(IA.4.8).
A user can change his current active clearance using the newrole –l command when using non-network terminals
(such as a serial console) or for starting noninteractive processes that do not interact with the terminal(IA.4.9). The
command requires the user to authenticate himself and allows to change his clearance to a new level and combination
of categories from the set of those assigned to him after successful authentication (IA.4.10)
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FIA_USB.1.
Page 70 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.2.5 Login Processing (IA.5)
At the login process the login, real, filesystem and effective user ID are set to the ID of the user that has logged in
(IA5.1). With the su command the real, filesystem and the effective user ID and the real, filesystem and the effective
group ID are changed but the login ID remains unchanged (IA.5.2).
When operating in LSPP mode, the role of the user is either the one specified by the user (provided it is within the set
of roles assigned to the user) or the user’s default role (IA.5.3).
When operating in LSPP mode, the sensitivity label of the user’s session is either the one specified by the user
(provided it is within the range allowed for the user) or the user’s default sensitivity label defined in his user profile
(IA.5.4).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FIA_USB.1.
7.2.2.6 TOE access (IA.6)
When initiating an interactive user session via login, ftp, or sshd, or running tasks on a user’s behalf via crond, the
system restricts the active role set for the user to the set of authorized roles for that user (IA.6.1). The system enforces
that the set of authorized roles for the user is never empty (IA.6.2).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FTA_LSA.1 and FTA_TSE.1.
7.2.3 Audit (AU)
The Lightweight Audit Framework (LAF) is designed to be a CAPP compliant audit system for Linux. LAF is built on
top of systrace which is a system call security policy enforcement engine first developed for BSD but ported to Linux.
The subsystem allows configuring the events to be actually audited from the set of all events that are possible to be
audited. Those events are configured in a specific configuration file and then the kernel is notified to build its own
internal structure for the events to be audited.
7.2.3.1 Audit Configuration (AU.1)
The system administrator can define the events to be audited from the overall events that the Lightweight Audit
Framework is able to audit using rules defined in the audit.rules audit configuration file using simple filter
expressions (AU1.1). This allows for a flexible definition of the events to be audited and the conditions under which
events are audited. The system administrator is also able to define a set of user IDs for which auditing is active
(AU1.2) or alternatively a set of user IDs that are not audited (AU1.3). Changes to the audit configuration take effect
when the audit daemon is notified about a change in the audit configuration (AU1.4).
This notification can only be performed by an administrative user (using the /etc/init.d/audit script with the ‘reload’
parameter) (AU1.5).
The system adminstrator can select files to be audited by adding them to a watch list that is loaded into the kernel
using the auditctl tool each time the audit system is started or reinitialized. The list allows the administrator to select
an arbitrary audit tag value for each file which will be preserved as a searchable attribute in the audit log (AU1.6). The
kernel interface for configuring these audit properties is usable only by root users (AU1.7).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_SEL.1 and FMT_MTD.1 (Management of audited
events).
7.2.3.2 Audit Processing (AU.2)
Auditing is performed on a per process basis. A process can enable or disabling auditing for itself by attaching itself
or detaching itself to the audit subsystem provided it is running with root privileges (AU2.1). The attribute of being
attached to the audit subsystem is inherited by all processes that are forked off from a process, which ensures that
events generated by child processes are also audited (AU2.2).
The kernel audits system calls in accordance with the rules defined in the audit.rules audit configuration file. In
addition, trusted processes can generate audit records and send them to the kernel (AU2.3). The login ID is associated
with audit events ensuring that events can be easily associated with the ID a user used to log into the TOE (AU2.4).
The events to be audited are forwarded by the kernel to an audit daemon, which writes the audit records to the audit
trail. An internal queuing mechanism is used for this purpose. When the queue does not have sufficient space to hold
an audit record the TOE switches into single user mode or is halted depending on the configuration of the audit
daemon (AU2.5). This ensures that audit records do not get lost due to resource shortage and the administrator can
backup and clear the audit trail to free disk space for new audit logs.
The audit daemon appends audit records to a file whose name is specified in the audit configuration file (AU2.6).
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 71 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The audit configuration file can be used to execute administrator-specified notification actions when the free disk
space available reaches an administrator-specified threshold (AU2.7). This is used to inform the system administrator
that he needs to back-up the current audit trail and make space available for additional audit records. In the case the
system administrator does not perform this in time and the available disk space is exhausted, the audit daemon can be
configured to switch to single user mode or to halt the whole system (AU2.8). In that case the system administrator
will need to back-up and clear the audit trail in single user mode and then re-boot the TOE in secure multiuser mode.
Access to audit data by normal users is prohibited by the discretionary access control function of the TOE, which is
used to restrict the access to the audit trail and audit configuration files to the system administrator only.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_SAR.2, FAU_STG.1, FAU_STG.3, FAU_STG.4
and FMT_MTD.1 (Management of the audit trail).
7.2.3.3 Audit Record Format (AU.3)
An audit record consists of one or more lines of text containing fields in a “keyword=value” tagged format. The
following information is contained in all audit record lines:
 Type: indicates the source of the event, such as SYSCALL, FS_WATCH, USER, or LOGIN
 Timestamp: Date and time the audit record was generated
 Audit ID: unique numerical event identifier
 Login ID (“auid”), the user ID of the user authenticated by the system (regardless if the user has changed his
real and / or effective user ID afterwards)
 Effective user ID: the effective user ID of the process at the time the audit event was generated
 Success or failure (where appropriate)
(AU3.1)
This information is followed by event specific data. In some cases, such as syscall event records involving file system
objects, multiple text lines will be generated for a single event, these all have the same timestamp and audit ID to
permit easy correlation. When operating in LSPP mode, audit records also contain the role the user currently operates
with (AU3.2) and the sensitivity labels of the subject and object (AU.3.3).
Note: Although the TOE distinguishes between the effective and the filesystem user ID, those two are identical in all
states of the TOE.
The event specific data will always contain data indicating if the request that caused the event has been successful or
not (AU.3.4).
The TOE maintains a “login ID” which is set when the user performs his initial login at a terminal or via a network
connection (AU.3.5). This login ID is maintained for actions of this user until he terminates the session. This login ID
remains unchanged when the user performs a switch of the real and / or effective and filesystem user ID by the su
command or by invoking a program that has the SUID bit set (AU.3.6). This allows tracing all actions to the real user.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_GEN.1 and FAU_GEN.2.
7.2.3.4 Audit Post-Processing (AU.4)
The TOE provides tools for managing ASCII files that can be used for post-processing of audit data. These tools
include:
less reads the ASCII audit data (AU.4.1).
ausearch allows selective extraction of records from the audit trail using defined selection criteria (AU.4.2)
The audit records are listed in chronological order by default. The sort utility can be used together with ausearch to
use a different sorting order (AU.4.3).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_SAR.1 and FAU_SAR.3.
7.2.4 Discretionary Access Control (DA)
This section outlines the general DAC policy in Red Hat Enterprise Linux as implemented for resources where access
is controlled by permission bits and POSIX ACLs; principally these are the objects in the file system. In all cases the
policy is based on user identity (and in some cases on group membership associated with the user identity). To allow
for enforcement of the DAC policy, all users must be identified and their identities authenticated.
Details of the specific DAC policy applied to each type of resource are covered in the section “Discretionary Access
Control: File System Objects” and the section “Discretionary Access Control: IPC Objects”.
Page 72 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Note: Signals are not subject to discretionary access control as described in this section of the Security Target. The
rules when a process is allowed to send a signal to another process are not seen as security relevant and therefore not
listed in this Security Target.
7.2.4.1 General DAC Policy (DA.1)
The general policy enforced is that subjects (i.e., processes) are allowed only the accesses specified by the class-
specific policies. Further, the ability to propagate access permissions is limited to those subjects who have that
permission, as determined by the class-specific policies.
Finally, a subject with a filesystem user ID of 0 is exempt from all restrictions of the discretionary access control and
can perform any action desired (DA1.1).
DAC provides the mechanism that allows users to specify and control access to objects that they own (DA1.2). DAC
attributes are assigned to objects at creation time and remain in effect until the object is destroyed or the object
attributes are changed (DA1.3). DAC attributes exist for, and are particular to, each type of object on Red Hat
Enterprise Linux. DAC is implemented with permission bits and, when specified, ACLs.
A subject whose filesystem user ID matches the file owner ID can change the file attributes, the base permissions, and
the extended permissions (except for read-only file systems, of course) (DA1.4). Changes to the file group are
restricted to the owner and root (DA1.5).
The new file group identifier must either be the current filesystem group identifier or one of the group identifiers in
the concurrent group set (DA1.6). In addition, a subject whose filesystem user ID is 0 can make any desired changes
to the file attributes, the base permissions, the extended permissions, and owning user of the file (see DA1.1).
Permission bits are the standard UNIX DAC mechanism and are used on all Red Hat Enterprise Linux file system
named objects (DA1.7). Individual bits are used to indicate permission for read, write, and execute access for the
object’s owner, the object’s group, and all other users (i.e. world). The extended permission mechanism is supported
only for file system objects within an ext3 file system and provides a finer level of granularity than do permission bits
(DA1.8).
Write access is in general not granted for files on a file system mounted as read-only (DA1.9). Write access is also
denied for files that have the immutable attribute (DA1.10).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FDP_ACC.1(1) and FDP_ACF.1(1).
7.2.4.2 Permission Bits (DA.2)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux supports standard UNIX permission bits to provide one form of DAC for file system
objects in all supported file systems (see section 1.5.2.1). There are three sets of three bits that define access for three
categories of users: the owning user, users in the owning group, and other users. The three bits in each set indicate the
access permissions granted to each user category: one bit for read (r), one for write (w) and one for execute (x). Note
that write access to file systems mounted as read only (e. g. CD-ROM) is always rejected. Note also that access to
specific objects in the /proc file system may be restricted to root regardless of the setting of the permission bits. In
addition, file systems do not necessarily support individually configured ownership and rights for files and
directories, the permissions may be predefined based on global per-filesystem properties or implicit object properties.)
Each subject’s access to an object is defined by some combination of these bits:
 rwx symbolizing read/write/execute
 r-x symbolizing read/execute
 r-- symbolizing read
 --- symbolizing null
(DA2.1)
When a process attempts to reference an object protected only by permission bits, the access is determined as follows:
 Users with a filesystem user ID of 0 are able to read and write all files, ignoring the permission bits. Users
with a filesystem user ID of zero are also able to execute any file if it is executable for someone.
 If the filesystem user ID = object’s owning user ID and the owning user permission bits allow the type of
access requested access is granted or denied with no further checks.
 If the filesystem group ID, or any supplementary groups of the process = object’s owning group ID, and
the owning group permission bits allow the type of access requested access is granted or denied with no
further checks.
 If the process is neither the owner nor a member of an appropriate group and the permission bits for world
allow the type of access requested, then the subject is permitted access.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 73 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 If none of the conditions above are satisfied, and the process is not the root identity, then the access attempt
is denied.
(DA2.2)
Each process has an inheritable “umask” attribute which is used to determine the default access permissions
for new objects. It is a bitmask of the user/group/other read/write/execute bits, and specifies the access bits
to be removed from new objects. For example, setting the umask to “002” ensures that new objects will be
writable by the owner and group, but not by others. (DA2.3)
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_SAR.2, FDP_ACC.1(1), FIA_USB.1 and
FDP_ACF.1(1).
7.2.4.3 Access Control Lists supported by Red Hat Enterprise Linux (DA.3)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux provides support for POSIX type ACLs for the ext3 file system allowing to define a fine
grained access control on a user basis. The semantics of those ACLs is summarized in this section.
An ACL entry contains the following information:
1. A tag type that specifies the type of the ACL entry
2. A qualifier that specifies an instance of an ACL entry type
3. A permission set that specifies the discretionary access rights for processes identified by the tag type and
qualifier
(DA3.1)
7.2.4.3.1 ACL Tag Types
The following tag types exist:
1. ACL_GROUP
an ACL entry of this type defines access rights for processes whose filesystem group ID or any
supplementary group IDs match the one in the ACL entry qualifier
2. ACL_GROUP_OBJ
an ACL entry of this type defines access rights for processes whose filesystem group ID or any
supplementary group IDs match the group ID of the group of the file
3. ACL_MASK
an ACL entry of this type defines the maximum discretionary access rights a process in the file group class
4. ACL_OTHER
an ACL entry of this type defines access rights for processes whose attributes do not match any other entry in
the ACL
5. ACL_USER
an ACL entry of this type defines access rights for processes whose filesystem user ID matches the ACL
entry qualifier
6. ACL_USER_OBJ
an ACL entry of this type defines access rights for processes whose filesystem user ID matches the user ID of
the owner of the file
(DA3.2)
7.2.4.3.2 ACL Qualifier
The qualifier is required for ACL entries of type ACL_GROUP and ACL_USER and contain either the user ID or the
group ID for which the access rights defined in the entry shall apply (DA3.3).
7.2.4.3.3 ACL Permissions
The permission that can be defined in an ACL entry are: read, write and execute/search (DA3.4).
7.2.4.3.4 Relation with File Permission Bits
An ACL contains exactly one entry for each of the ACL_USER_OBJ, ACL_GROUP_OBJ, and ACL_OTHER tag
type (called the „required ACL entries”) (DA3.5). An ACL may have between zero and a defined maximum number
of entries of the type ACL_GROUP and ACL_USER (DA3.6).
An ACL that has only the three required ACL entries is called a „minimum ACL”. ACLs with one or more ACL
entries of type ACL_GROUP or ACL_USER are called an „extended ACL”.
Page 74 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The standard UNIX file permission bits as described in the previous section are represented by the entries in the
minimum ACL. The owner permission bits are represented by the entry of type ACL_USER_OBJ, the entry of type
ACL_GROUP_OBJ represent the permission bits of the file’s group and the entry of type ACL_OTHER represents
the permission bits of processes running with a filesystem user ID and filesystem group ID or supplementary group
ID different from those defined in ACL_USER_OBJ and ACL_GROUP_OBJ entries (DA3.7).
7.2.4.3.5 ACL_MASK
If an ACL contains an ACL_GROUP or ACL_USER type entry, then exactly one entry of type ACL_MASK is
required in the ACL. Otherwise the entry of type ACL_MASK is optional (DA3.8).
7.2.4.3.6 Default ACLs
A default ACL is an additional ACL which may be associated with a directory. This default ACL has no effect on the
access to this directory. Instead the default ACL is used to initialize the ACL for any file that is created in this
directory. If the new file created is a directory it inherits the default ACL from its parent directory (DA3.9).
When an object is created within a directory and the ACL is not defined with the function creating the object, the new
object inherits the default ACL of its parent directory as its initial ACL.
7.2.4.3.7 Discretionary Access Check Evaluation Algorithm
When a process attempts to reference an object protected by an ACL, it does so through a system call (e.g., open,
exec). If the object has been assigned an ACL access is determined as according to the algorithm below:
DISCRETIONARY ACCESS CHECK ALGORITHM
A process may request read, write, or execute/search access to a file system object protected by an ACL. The
discretionary access check algorithm determines whether access to the object will be granted according to the DAC
policy. In LSPP mode, Role-based access control and the sensitivity label based mandatory access control can impose
additional restrictions denying access even when the DAC algorithm would allow access.
1. Write access to a file on a read-only file system will always be denied for file system objects other than device
special files.
2. Write access to a file with the immutable attribute will always be denied.
3. If the filesystem user ID of the process matches the user ID of the
file object owner, then
if the ACL_USER_OBJ entry contains the requested permissions,
access is granted,
else access is denied
4. else if the filesystem user ID of the process matches the qualifier of any entry of type ACL_USER, then
if the matching ACL_USER entry and the ACL_MASK entry contain the requested permissions,
access is granted,
else access is denied.
5. else if the filesystem group ID or any of the supplementary group IDs of the process match the qualifier
of the entry of type ACL_GROUP_OBJ, or the qualifier of any entry of type ACL_GROUP, then
if the ACL_MASK entry and any of the matching ACL_GROUP_OBJ or
ACL_GROUP entries contain all the requested permissions,
access is granted,
else access is denied
6. else if the ACL_OTHER entry contains the requested permissions,
access is granted.
7. else access is denied.
(DA3.10)
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FDP_ACC.1(1) , FIA_USB.1 and FDP_ACF.1(1)
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 75 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.4.3.8 DAC Revocation on File System Objects
File system objects access checks are performed when the object is initially opened, and are not checked on each
subsequent access. Changes to access controls (i.e., revocation) are effective with the next attempt to open the object
(DA3.11).
In cases where an administrative user determines that immediate revocation of access to a file system object is
required, the administrative user can reboot the computer, resulting in a close on the object and forcing an open of the
object on system reboot.
7.2.4.3.9 DAC: Directory
The execute permission bit for directories governs the ability to name the directory as part of a pathname.A process
must have search (execute) access in order to traverse the directory during pathname resolution (DA3.12).
Directories may not be written directly, but only by creating, renaming, and removing (unlinking) objects within
them. These operations are considered writes for the purpose of the DAC policy (DA3.13).
7.2.4.3.10 DAC: UNIX Domain Socket Special File
UNIX domain socket files are treated as files in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux file system from the perspective of
access control, with the exception that using the bind or connect system calls requires that the calling process must
have write access to the socket file (DA3.14).
UNIX domain sockets exist in the file system name space, the socket files can have both base mode bits and extended
ACL entries (DA3.15).
UNIX domain sockets consist of a socket special file (managed by the File System) and a corresponding socket
structure (managed by IPC). The TOE controls access to the socket based upon the caller’s rights to the socket special
file (DA3.16).
7.2.4.3.11 DAC: Named Pipes
Named pipes are treated identically to any other file in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux file system from the perspective
of access control. Therefore permission bits and extended permissions can be used (DA3.17). For this reason named
pipes are listed as file system objects (although they are used for interprocess communication). Note that named pipes
follow the rules for IPC objects, if no ACLs are used (which probably is the normal case they are used).
7.2.4.3.12 DAC: Device Special File
The access control scheme described for file system objects is used for protection of character and block device
special files (DA3.18). Most device special files are configured to allow read and write access by the root user, and
read access by privileged groups. With the exception of terminal and pseudo-terminal devices and a few special cases
(e.g., /dev/null and /dev/tty), devices are configured to be not accessible to normal users (DA3.19). The access mode
of device files for ttys is changed during login time to read/write access of the user logging into the system; on logout
the access rights are reset to allow only access by root (DA3.20).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FDP_ACC.1(1), FDP_ACF.1(1), FMT_MSA.1(1),
FMT_SMF.1, FMT_MSA.3(1), FIA_USB.1 and ADV_ARC.1.
7.2.4.4 Discretionary Access Control: IPC Objects (DA.4)
7.2.4.4.1 DAC: SYSV Shared Memory
For shared memory segment objects (henceforth SMSs), access checks are performed when the SMS is initially
attached, and are not checked on each subsequent access. Changes to access controls (i.e., revocation) are effective
with the next attempt to attach to the SMS (DA4.1).
In cases where an administrative user determines that immediate revocation of access to a SMS is required, the
administrative user can reboot the computer, thus destroying the SMS and all access to it.
If a process requests deletion of a SMS, it is not deleted until the last process that is attached to the SMS detaches
itself (or equivalently, the last process attached to the SMS terminates) (DA4.2).
The default access control on newly created SMSs is determined by the effective user ID and group ID of the process
that created the SMS and the specific permissions requested by the process creating the SMS (DA4.3).
 The owning user and creating user of a newly created SMS will be the effective user ID of the creating
process (DA4.4).
Page 76 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 The owning group and creating group of a newly created SMS will be the effective group ID of the
creating process (DA4.5).
 The creating process must specify the initial access permissions on the SMS, or they are set to null and the
object is inaccessible until the owner sets them (DA4.6).
 SMSs do not have ACLs as described above, they only have permission bits (DA4.7).
Access permissions can be changed by any process with an effective user ID equal to the owning user ID or creating
user ID of the SMS (DA4.8). Access permissions can also be changed by any process with an effective user ID of 0,
also known as running with the root identity (DA4.9).
7.2.4.4.2 DAC: POSIX and SYSV Message Queues
For message queues, access checks are performed for each access request (e.g., to send or receive a message in the
queue) (DA4.10). Changes to access controls (i.e., revocation) are effective upon the next request for access
(DA4.11). That is, the change affects all future send and receive operations, except if a process has already made a
request for the message queue and is waiting for its availability (e.g., a process is waiting to receive a message), in
which case the access change is not effective for that process until the next request (DA4.12).
If a process requests deletion of a message queue, it is not deleted until the last process that is waiting for the message
queue receives its message (or equivalently, the last process waiting for a message in the queue terminates) (DA4.13).
However, once a message queue has been marked as deleted, additional processes cannot perform messaging
operations and it cannot be undeleted (DA4.14).
The default access control on newly created message queues is determined by the effective user ID and group ID of
the process that created the message queue and the specific permissions requested by the process creating the message
queue.
 The owning user and creating user of a newly created message queue will be the effective user ID of the
creating process.
 The owning group and creating group of a newly created message queue will be the effective group ID of
the creating process.
 The initial access permissions on the message queue must be specified by the creating process, or they are
set to null and the object is inaccessible until the owner sets them.
 Message queues do not use ACLs as described above, they only have permission bits.
(DA4.15)
Access permissions can be changed by any process with an effective user ID equal to the owning user ID or creating
user ID of the message queue. Access permissions can also be changed by any process with an effective user ID of 0
(DA4.16).
7.2.4.4.3 DAC: SYSV Semaphores
For semaphores, access checks are performed for each access request (e.g., to lock or unlock the semaphore)
(DA4.17). Changes to access controls (i.e., revocation) are effective upon the next request for access (DA4.18). That
is, the change affects all future semaphore operations, except if a process has already made a request for the
semaphore and is waiting for its availability, in which case the access change is not effective for that process until the
next request (DA4.19).
In cases where an administrative user determines that immediate revocation of access to a semaphore is required, the
administrative user can reboot the computer, thus destroying the semaphore and any processes waiting for it. This
method is the described in the Evaluated Configuration Guide. Since a semaphore exists only within a single host in
the network, rebooting the particular host where the semaphores is present is sufficient to revoke all access to that
semaphore.
If a process requests deletion of a semaphore, it is not deleted until the last process that is waiting for the semaphore
obtains its lock (or equivalently, the last process waiting for the semaphore terminates) (DA4.20). However, once a
semaphore has been marked as deleted, additional processes cannot perform semaphore operations and it cannot be
undeleted (DA4.21).
The default access control on newly created semaphores is determined by the effective user ID and group ID of the
process that created the semaphore and the specific permissions requested by the process creating the semaphore
(DA4.22).
 The owning user and creating user of a newly created semaphore will be the effective user ID of the
creating process.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 77 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
 The owning group and creating group of a newly created semaphore will be the effective group ID of the
creating process.
 The initial access permissions on the semaphore must be specified by the creating process, or they are set to
null and the object is inaccessible until the owner sets them.
 Semaphores do not have ACLs as described above, they only have permission bits
(DA4.23).
Access permissions can be changed by any process with an effective user ID equal to the owning user ID or creating
user ID of the semaphore (DA4.24). Access permissions can also be changed by any process with an effective user ID
of 0 (DA4.25).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FDP_ACC.1(1), FDP_ACF.1(1), FMT_MSA.1(1),
FMT_SMF.1, FIA_USB.1, and FMT_MSA.3(1).
7.2.5 Role-Based Access Control (RA) (LSPP mode only)
The TOE allows defining roles in the SELinux policy by assigning the domain types to the role to which a user in that
role may transition. Each subject has a single active role at all times. The following roles are defined in the TOE policy
in LSPP mode:
Administrative roles:
 system: The operating system supports multiple roles for noninteractive system processes such as daemons.
All non-interactive roles are considered to be subdivisions of a conceptual “system” role. The additional
restrictions enforced on system services are beyond the scope of this Security Target. The definition of
system roles allows separating those from users (RA.1.2).
 sysadm: This is a role defined for general system administration tasks (RA.1.3), including setting or
modifying security contexts, and changing the sensitivity label of a subject or object (RA.1.4).
 auditadm: This is a role for the management of the audit configuration and evaluation of the audit records
(RA.1.5).
Non-administrative roles:
 Staff: This is a role for users that are allowed use the newrole command to transition to administrative roles
(RA.1.6).
 User: This is a generic role for all users (as opposed to system processes) (RA.1.7).
Each user has a set of permitted roles and a default role (both defined by the administrator) and may select an active
role using the newrole command from the set of permitted roles. Rules in the policy also define which transitions
between roles are allowed. Role transition requests succeed only if the new role is in the set of permitted roles for the
current user, and if the policy allows a transition from the current role to the new role (RA.1.8).
Administrators can define additional roles using SELinux loadable policy modules defined using the checkmodule,
semodule_package, and semodule utilities as documented in the Evaluated Configuration Guide (RA.1.9). A role
definition consists of a set of permitted role transitions to or from that role, and a set of SELinux domains which
correspond to rights associated with the role. Additional roles may be administrative roles with permission to use
domains that have specific privileges, including DAC and MAC override capabilities (RA.1.10). The policy tools
ensure that role definitions may only be removed from the system if the rule is not included in the permitted rule set
for any user.
RBAC access checks are performed whenever a subject accesses an object, with the permission based on the subject’s
domain, the object’s type, and the operation attempted. The RBAC policy covers all objects covered by the DAC
policy. SELinux “allow” rules define the specific access rights to object types for the domains that are associated with
the role. Any access attempt from a domain to an object type that is not explicitly permitted by a SELinux “allow” rule
is rejected.
Role-based access checks can veto actions that would normally be permitted by DAC or MAC rules, but can never
permit something that would be denied according to DAC or MAC rules (RA.1.11). Access is permitted only if all
applicable policies (DAC, RBAC, and MAC in LSPP mode) agree that the access is permitted (RA.1.12).
Whenever an operation would result in an illegal SELinux context for a subject or object, for example an invalid
combination of role and SELinux user class, the operation will fail and leave the subject and object properties
unchanged (for modifying operations), or refuse creation (for creating operations). This ensures that subjects always
have exactly one active role.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FMT_SMR.2, FDP_ACC.1(2), FDP_ACF.1(2),
FMT_MSA.1(3,4,5,6), FIA_USB.1, and FMT_MSA.3(3).
Page 78 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.6 Mandatory Access Control (MA) (LSPP mode only)
7.2.6.1 Information Flow Control (MA.1) (LSPP mode only)
When operated in LSPP mode the TOE supports mandatory access control using sensitivity labels automatically
attached to processes and objects. This policy is enforced by the SELinux security module and the TOE specific
SELinux policy.
Sensitivity labels consist of a hierarchical part (the level) and a nonhierarchical set of categories.
The SELinux security module attaches a “sensitivity label” as part of the security context to the following objects in
the kernel (MA.1.1):
 Inodes
 Files
 Directories
 Block devices
 Character devices
 Sockets
 The following list of IPC objects:
o SYSV Message queues and messages
o SYSV shared memory
o SYSV semaphores
o POSIX message queues and messages
 The following network objects:
o Ports
o Network Interfaces
o Nodes (IP address or netmask)
 Key objects in the kernel key store
Processes are subjects with associated security contexts. When sending signals using the kill system call, the process
security contexts are used to decide if the sending (active) process has permission to do so.
In addition a task as a subject in the kernel also has a security context attached (MA.1.2). Each process has an
effective or “low” sensitivity label (consisting of a hierarchical level and zero or more categories), and a separate
“process clearance” or “high” sensitivity label which must dominate the effective label. The effective level is used for
all access checks except for processes with the “mlsreadtoclr” override attribute. Access control is performed based on
the sensitivity labels of the task and the object. When the tasks attempts a write access to the object, access is granted
by the mandatory access control policy only when the effective sensitivity label of the task is equal to the sensitivity
label of the object (MA.1.3). (This is a stricter variant of the “write up” policy required by FDP_IFF.2.) Read access is
granted by the mandatory access control policy only when the effective sensitivity label of the task dominates the
sensitivity label of the object (MA.1.4). In addition the access needs to be granted by the role the user associated with
the task is operating with as well as by the discretionary access control algorithm. When in LSPP mode all three access
control policies implemented by the TOE must allow access before the operation attempting to access the object is
allowed to proceed.
Attaching the security context to those objects, evaluating the security context in case of access attempts and
managing the security context of subjects and objects is performed by functions that SELinux provides for the kernel
hooks defined in the LSM framework. The functions at those hooks ensure that all subjects and objects get a security
context (including a sensitivity label) when they are created in accordance with the rules of the mandatory access
control policy. The functions of SELinux also ensure that the sensitivity labels are evaluated whenever a task performs
a function that accesses one of the objects listed above. This is implemented as SELinux constraints which veto any
access that violates the MAC policy. These constraints cannot be removed by administrator defined local policy
modifications when those are performed in accordance with the Evaluated Configuration Guide [ECG].
The MAC policy constraints define specific override capabilities for trusted subjects and objects as follows (MA.1.5):
Table 7-1: Override Capabilities
Attribute Interface Description
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 79 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Used in
“typeattribute”
statements (*.if files)
and “mlsconstrain”
rules (“policy/mls”
file)
Refpolicy macros used in *.te
files to give the right to
specific domains
From the “policy/modules/kernel/mls.if” refpolicy
file.
“MLS trusted” means the operation is permitted by
the MLS access check, but may still be denied by the
DAC or RBAC policy.
“proc” or “process” read/write refers to pseudofiles
in the proc file system for processes other than the
current process.
“files” includes all filesystem objects other than
procfs pseudofiles.
“higher” means “not dominated by the subject level”
and includes incomparable labels.
“lower” means “not dominating the subject level”
and includes incomparable labels.
“process clearance” is the high level for the process
(as opposed to the “low” level which is the effective
level for all access checks except the “readtoclr”
operation).
mlsfileread mls_file_read_up Make specified domain MLS trusted for reading from
files at higher levels.
mlsfilewrite mls_file_write_down Make specified domain MLS trusted for writing to files
at lower levels.
mlsfileupgrade mls_file_upgrade Make specified domain MLS trusted for raising the
level of files.
mlsfiledowngrade mls_file_downgrade Make specified domain MLS trusted for lowering the
level of files.
mlsnetread mls_socket_read_all_levels Make specified domain MLS trusted for reading from
sockets at any level.
mlsnetreadtoclr mls_socket_read_to_clearance Make specified domain MLS trusted for reading from
sockets at any level that is dominated by the process
clearance.
mlsnetwrite mls_socket_write_all_levels Make specified domain MLS trusted for writing to
sockets at any level.
mlsnetrecvall mls_net_receive_all_levels Make specified domain MLS trusted for receiving
network data from network interfaces or hosts at any
level.
mlsipcread mls_sysvipc_read_all_levels Make specified domain MLS trusted for reading from
System V IPC objects at any level.
mlsipcwrite mls_sysvipc_write_all_levels Make specified domain MLS trusted for writing to
System V IPC objects at any level.
privrangetrans mls_rangetrans_source Allow the specified domain to do a MLS range
transition that changes the current level.
mlsrangetrans mls_rangetrans_target Make specified domain a target domain for MLS range
transitions that change the current level.
mlsprocread mls_process_read_up Make specified domain MLS trusted for reading from
processes at higher levels.
mlsprocwrite mls_process_write_down Make specified domain MLS trusted for writing to
processes at lower levels.
mlsprocsetsl mls_process_set_level Make specified domain MLS trusted for setting the
level of processes it executes.
mlstrustedobject mls_trusted_object Make specified object MLS trusted.
Page 80 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
(The shipped MLS policy includes definitions for X11 objects which are not relevant for the evaluated configuration.)
Trusted subjects are programs launched by administrators and trusted programs running with elevated privileges, as
indicated by domains with MLS type attributes such as “mlsfileread”.
Trusted objects (with object type attribute “mlstrustedobject”) are pseudofiles that do not actually store data and may
therefore override MLS access restrictions, for example the /dev/null and /dev/zero devices which need to be
accessible to processes at all sensitivity levels, and /dev/tty which is an alias for the current terminal device.
Whenever an operation would result in an illegal SELinux context for a subject or object, for example an invalid MLS
sensitivity label, the operation will fail and leave the subject and object properties unchanged (for modifying
operations), or refuse creation (for creating operations). This ensures that subjects and objects always have a valid
sensitivity label.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FDP_IFC.1, FDP_IFF.1, FIA_USB.1, and
FMT_MSA.3(2).
7.2.6.2 Import/Export of labeled data (MA.2) (LSPP mode only)
The system supports import and export of unlabeled data from/to single level devices. Changes in device level must
be performed manually by the administrator and are auditable. (MA.2.1)
The star tool permits import and export of labeled filesystem data when used by administrators by creating archives
that preserve label information (MA.2.2).
The print spooler converts input into bitmaps and adds human readable labels to the bitmaps based on the input data
label. The final bitmap is encapsulated into either PCL 4 or PostScript level 1 (depending on the print queue
configuration) and sent to the printer via a parallel or Ethernet interface. The printer must support the configured
printer language. (MA.2.3).
The TOE IPsec and CIPSO implementations allow assigning labels to network objects and enforcing the mandatory
access control policy based on those labels. (MA.2.4)
The IPsec implementation can be used for encrypted and authenticated network communication which is beyond the
scope of this Security Target. IPsec is only supported for the purpose of labeled networking, and only in transport
mode. Tunnel mode is not supported.
Trusted programs are used to administer the IPsec policy: setkey, racoonctl and racoon. setkey can be used to edit the
security policy database and specify when which security association is to be used in the communication between two
systems (e. g. for which ports). racoon is a daemon that can set up security associations automatically. The racoon
daemon can be administered using the racoonctl trusted program.
The CIPSO policy is configured using the netlabelctl trusted program.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FDP_ETC,1, FDP_ETC.2, FDP_ITC.1, FDP_ITC.2, and
FPT_TDC.1.
7.2.7 Object Reuse (OR)
Object Reuse is the mechanism that protects against scavenging, or being able to read information that is left over
from a previous subject’s actions. Explicit initialization is appropriate for most TSF-managed abstractions, where the
resource is implemented by some TSF internal data structure whose contents are not visible outside the TSF: queues,
datagrams, pipes, and devices. These resources are completely initialized when created, and have no information
contents remaining.
Explicit clearing is used in Red Hat Enterprise Linux only for directory entries, because they are accessible in two
ways: through TSF interfaces both for managing directories and for reading files. Because this exposes the internal
structure of the resource, it must be explicitly cleared on release to prevent the internal state from remaining visible.
Storage management is used in conjunction with explicit initialization for object reuse on files, and processes. This
technique keeps track of how storage is used, and whether it can safely be made available to a subject.
The following sections describe in detail how object reuse is handled for the different types of objects and data areas
and how the requirements defined in FDP_RIP.2 are satisfied.
7.2.7.1 Object Reuse: File System Objects (OR.1)
All file system objects (FSOs) available to general users are accessed by a common mechanism for allocating disk
storage and a common mechanism for paging data to and from disk. This includes the Journaling File System (ext3).
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 81 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Object reuse is irrelevant for the CD-ROM File System (ISO-9660) because it is a read-only file system and so it is
not possible for a user to read residual data left by a previous user. File systems on other media (tapes, diskettes.) are
irrelevant because of warnings in the Evaluated Configuration Guide not to mount file systems on these devices.
Note that ext3 and ISO 9660 are the only supported disk based filesystems. All other filesystems do not have
persistent backing storage and therefore object reuse of disk space is not an issue for them.
Object reuse in the tmpfs file system is handled by the memory management object reuse functions. When allocating
new space for a file, the TOE uses the functions of the memory management which clear the memory before it is
allocated.
Object reuse for objects in the devpts file system is handled by the VFS layer.
The procfs, sysfs, selinuxfs, binfmt_misc, and rootfs file systems only provide a very limited view of specific in-
kernel data structures and cannot be used for arbitrary data storage. Object reuse is handled inside the kernel when
allocating and deallocating data structures.
For this analysis, the term FSO refers not only to named file system objects (files, directories, device special files,
named pipes, and UNIX domain sockets) but also to other abstractions that use file system storage (symbolic links
and unnamed pipes). All of these, except unnamed pipes, have a directory entry that contains the last part of the
pathname and an inode that controls access rights and points to the disk blocks used by the FSO.
In general, file system objects are created with no contents. Directories and symbolic links are exceptions, and some
of their content is specified at creation time (OR1.1).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FDP_RIP.2.
7.2.7.2 Object Reuse: IPC Objects (OR.2)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux shared memory, message queues, and semaphores are initialized to all zeroes at creation.
These objects are of a finite size (shared memory segment is from one byte to the value defined in
/proc/sys/kernel/shmmax, semaphore is one bit), and so there is no way to grow the object beyond its initial size
(OR2.1).
No processing is performed when the objects are accessed or when the objects are released back to the pool.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FDP_RIP.2.
7.2.7.3 Object Reuse: Memory Objects (OR.3)
A new process’s context is completely initialized from the process’s parent when the fork system call is issued. All
program visible aspects of the process context are fully initialized. All kernel data structures associated with the new
process are copied from the parent process, then modified to describe the new process, and are fully initialized
(OR3.1).
The Linux kernel zeroes each memory page before allocating it to a process. This pertains to memory in the program’s
data segment and memory in shared memory segments (OR3.2). When a process requests more memory from the
kernel, the memory is explicitly cleared before the process can gain access to it (OR3.3). This does not include
memory that has been buffered by the library routines used by process. But this memory has already been allocated to
the process by the kernel (cleared for object reuse at that time). Note that process internal memory management and
buffering is not subject of this Security Target.
When the kernel performs a context switch from one thread to another, it saves the previous thread’s General Purpose
Registers (GPRs) and restores the new thread’s GPRs, completely overwriting any residual data left in the previous
thread’s registers (OR3.4). Floating Point Registers (FPRs) are saved only if a process has used them. The act of
accessing an FPR causes the kernel to subsequently save and restore all the FPRs for the process, thus overwriting any
residual data in those registers (OR3.5).
Processes are created with all attributes taken from the parent. The process inherits its memory (text and data
segments), registers, and file descriptors from its parent (OR3.6). When a process execs a new program, the text
segment is replaced entirely.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FDP_RIP.2 and Note 1.
7.2.8 Security Management (SM)
This section describes the functions for the management of security attributes that exist within Red Hat Enterprise
Linux.
In addition to specific utilities mentioned in this section, administrators can use the rnano editor to modify
configuration files and scripts when the system does not supply a specific trusted program designed to do so.
Page 82 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.8.1 Roles (SM.1)
The TOE maintains a hierarchical set of roles with some administrative roles and two user roles as defined in section
7.2.5 of this document (SM1.1).
In the evaluated configuration, the set of administrative users consists of those with permission to use the newrole
utility to switch to an administrative role. Every administrative user has a unique personal userid to log into the
system. This helps to provide accountability and to prevent misuse of privileges. The userid “root” cannot be used for
direct login except for login from the system console.
Using the SELinux role-based access control model each user may be authorized for a set of roles, and each role is
authorized for a set of type enforcement (TE) domains. A role dominance relationship can optionally be specified in
the configuration to define a hierarchy among roles. The assignment of permissions is primarily deferred to the TE
configuration. This approach combines the ease of management provided by the RBAC model with the fine-grained
protections provided by the TE model.
The SELinux RBAC model maintains a role attribute in the security context of each process. For objects, the role
attribute is typically set to a generic object_r role and is unused.
SELinux maintains a user identity attribute in the security context that is independent of the Linux user identity
attributes. The policy configuration limits the ability to change the SELinux user identity attribute to certain TE
domains. These domains are associated with certain programs, such as login, crond, and sshd, that have been modified
to call functions from libselinux to set the SELinux user identity appropriately. Hence, user login sessions and cron
jobs are initially associated with the appropriate SELinux user identity, but subsequent changes in the Linux uid may
not be reflected in the SELinux user identity. In some cases, this is desirable in order to provide user accountability or
to prevent security violations.
In LSPP mode, even the administrative roles are subject to MAC checks. The exception is the special Unconfined role
which can be used to selectively circumvent MAC restrictions, this role is by default not made available to
administrators.
7.2.8.1.1 Administrative Users
Users that are allowed to use the newrole command to switch to an administrative role can perform administrative
actions. Users that don’t have the privilege to use newrole to switch to an administrative role can not perform
administrative actions. Users that are not member of the trusted group can also not login as root even if they know the
root password (SM1.2).
7.2.8.1.2 Normal Users
Normal users can not perform actions that require administrative privileges. They can only execute those setuid root
programs they have access to (SM1.3). In the evaluated configuration this is restricted to those programs they need
such as the passwd program that allows a user to change his/her own password. Note that the use of passwd to change
the own password may be prohibited by the user’s role.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FMT_SMR.2.
7.2.8.2 Access Control Configuration and Management (SM.2)
Access control to objects is defined by the permission bits or by the Access Control Lists (for those objects that have
access control lists associated with them). Default access permission bits are defined in the system configuration files
that define the value of the access control bits for objects being created without explicit definition of the permission
bits. The administrative user can define and modify those default values.
Permissions can be changed by the object owner and an administrative user (SM2.1). When an object is created the
creator is the object owner (SM2.2). Object ownership can be transferred (SM2.3). In the case of IPC objects, the
creator will always have the same right as the owner, even when the ownership has been transferred (SM2.4).
In LSPP mode specifically authorized users can modify the sensitivity labels of objects using the chcon command.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FMT_MSA.1, FMT_MSA.3, FMT_SMF.1 and
FMT_REV.1 „Object Attributes”.
7.2.8.3 Management of User, Group and Authentication Data (SM.3)
7.2.8.3.1 Creating new Users
An administrative user can create a new user and assigns a unique userid to this user. The initial password has to be
defined using the passwd command. The new user will be disabled until the initial password is set (SM3.1).
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 83 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Attributes that can be set for each user are among others (a complete list can be found in the description of the
useradd command and the description of the content of the files /etc/passwd and /etc/groups):
 Administrative status of the user
 List of groups the user belongs to
 Home directory for this user
Those attributes are stored in the file /etc/passwd and /etc/groups (for the list of all groups the user belongs to).
(SM3.2)
Additional user attributes such as the set of permitted roles and security labels (level range and permitted categories)
are stored in the /etc/selinux/mls/seusers and /etc/selinux/mls/users/* files.
7.2.8.3.2 Modification of user attributes
User attributes can be modified by an administrative user. Modifications of user attributes require the modification of
the administration database that contains the user attributes including the user roles (mainly /etc/passwd,
/etc/selinux/mls/users/*, and etc/selinux/mls/seusers) (SM3.3).
7.2.8.3.3 Management of Authentication Data
An administrative user has the capability to define rules and restrictions for passwords used to authenticate users. The
parameters available are:
 The number of days (since January 1, 1970) since the password was last changed.
 The number of days before password may be changed (0 indicates it may be changed at any time)
 The number of days after which password must be changed (99999 indicates user can keep his or her
password unchanged for many, many years)
 The number of days to warn user of an expiring password (7 for a full week)
 The number of days after password expires that account is disabled
(SM3.4)
All users except those only have the “user” role are also allowed to change their own password using the passwd
command. The password restrictions defined by the administrative user apply (SM3.5).
This list of attributes satisfies those required by FIA_ATD.1. In addition this function contributes to satisfy the
security requirements FIA_SOS.1, FMT_MTD.1 „User Attributes”, FMT_MTD.1 „Authentication Data”,
FMT_SMF.1 and FMT_REV.1 „User Attributes”.
7.2.8.4 Management of Audit Configuration (SM.4)
The TOE allows configuring the events to be audited. Those events are defined in a specific configuration file and
then the /etc/init.d/audit script with the ‘reload’ parameter is used to notify the audit subsystem about modifications in
the rules defining the events to be audited. The use of the auditd command and the /etc/init.d/audit script is restricted
to administrative users. In addition the TOE allows an administrative user to start or stop the audit subsystem (also
using the /etc/init.d/audit script to start the audit subsystem (using the ‘start” parameter) or stop the audit subsystem
(using the ‘stop’ parameter) (SM4.1).
The administrative user can define the events to be audited in form of a set of rules using simple filter expressions
(SM4.2).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FAU_GEN.1 and FAU_SEL.1 as well as FMT_MTD.1
(Management of the audit trail) and FMT_MTD.1 (Management of audited events)
7.2.8.5 Reliable Time Stamps (SM.5)
The TOE maintains a reliable clock used to generate time stamps as required for the TOE itself and applications. The
audit subsystem requires such a reliable time source for the date and time field in the header of each audit record. The
clock uses timers provided by the hardware and interrupt routines that update the value of the clock maintained by the
TOE.
The initial value for this clock may be provided by a hardware clock that is part of the TOE hardware, by a trusted
external time source (e. g. via the ntp protocol) or by a system administrator in the sysadm role setting the initial
value. Hardware time sources that are not found on the TOE hardware but are connected to the TOE hardware as
auxiliary hardware are part of the TOE environment. Only a system administrator in the sysadm role is allowed to
Page 84 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
overwrite the value of the clock maintained by the TOE (e. g. to correct the value in case it has drifted over time due to
some inaccuracy of the hardware timer used by the TOE) (SM5.1).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FPT_STM.1
7.2.9 Secure Communication (SC)
The TOE provides the ability to protect communication by cryptographic mechanism against disclosure and
undetected unauthorized modification. The TOE supports protocols (SSH v2.0 and SSL v3) that provide protection of
communication against the above mentioned threats. Note that communication using other protocols is not
protected against those threats.
The cryptography used in this product has not been FIPS 140 certified. This Security Target claims
compliance with the external standard for the cipher suites explained by the SFRs of FCS_COP.1 including
all its iterations for the definition of the encryption algorithm. There are many ways of determining
compliance with a standard. The vendor has chosen to make a developer claim of compliance supported
with verification by an independent FIPS accredited lab. This means that there has been an independent
verification by the independent lab consistent with the NIST cryptographic algorithm validation program
that the implementation of the cryptographic algorithms actually meets the claimed standards. Additional
verification of ciphers not covered by the cryptographic algorithm validation program was conducted by
the FIPS accredited lab.
The protocols SSH v2.0 and SSL v3 allow a secure communication between the TOE and a remote trusted IT product
(which may be another instantiation of the TOE itself) over an insecure network. Within the TOE the protocols are
configured to allow the secure tunneling of TCP based protocols. The difference between the two possibilities for
tunneling consists in the authentication involved.
In the case of the SSH protocol the TOE supports establishing a secure connection allowing an application on a client
system to set up the communication to the server side system after successful user authentication. This allows users to
get access to a shell from a remote system but also to perform actions such as secure file transfer where access to the
files on the remote system is protected by the access control mechanisms.
In the case of the SSL protocol, the TOE would allow to set up a secure communication channel between a client and
an untrusted application (e. g. a web server) on the server side. This would allow a client to access the web server
without user authentication but (depending on the configuration of the SSL server) with the certificate based
authentication of the client system.
7.2.9.1 Secure Protocols (SC.1)
The TOE offers several protocols that applications can use to securely communicate with another trusted IT product
(provided this supports those protocols in the same way as the TOE does). Those protocols are:
 the Secure Shell Transport Layer Protocol Version 2 [SSH-TRANS] and the Secure Shell Authentication
Protocol [SSH-AUTH]
 the Secure Socket Layer Protocol Version 3 [SSLv3]
The SSH and SSL protocols are able to establish a secure channel between a client and a server process (SC1.1). The
TOE supports both the client as well as the server processes for both of those protocols and therefore is able to initiate
a connection as well as act as the receiver part. Both protocols provide the ability to “tunnel” an otherwise unprotected
single port TCP based protocol.
7.2.9.1.1 The Secure Shell Protocol
The TOE provides the Secure Shell Protocol Version 2 (SSH v2.0) to allow users from a remote host to establish a
secure connection and perform a logon to the TOE.
The following table documents implementation details concerning the OpenSSH implementation’s compliance to the
relevant standards. It addresses areas where the standards permit different implementation choices such as optional
features.
Table 7-2: SSH implementation notes
Reference Description Implementation details
[SSH-TRANS] 5. Compatibility With Old
SSH Versions
The OpenSSH implementation is capable of interoperating with
clients and servers using the old 1.x protocol. That functionality
is explicitly disabled in the evaluated configuration, it permits
protocol version 2.0 exclusively.
[SSH-TRANS] 6.2 Compression OpenSSH supports the OPTIONAL “zlib” compression method.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 85 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
[SSH-TRANS] 6.3 Encryption The ciphers supported in the evaluated configuration are
detailed below.
[SSH-AUTH] 7. Public Key Authentication
Method: “publickey”
This REQUIRED authentication method is supported by the
OpenSSH implementation but disabled in the evaluated
configuration, it permits password authentication exclusively.
[SSH-AUTH] 8. Password Authentication
Method: “password”
This SHOULD authentication method is supported by
OpenSSH and is the only authentication method used in the
evaluated configuration.
[SSH-AUTH] 8. Password change request
and setting new password
The OpenSSH implementation supports the optional password
change mechanism in the evaluated configuration.
[SSH-AUTH] 9. Host-Based
Authentication:
“hostbased”
This OPTIONAL authentication method is disabled in the
evaluated configuration.
The TOE supports the following security functions of the SSH v2.0 protocol:
1. Establishing a secure communication channel using the following cryptographic functions provided by the
SSH v2.0 protocol:
o Encryption using three key Triple DES in CBC mode (3des-cbc as defined in section 4.3 of [SSH-
TRANS]) (SC1.2)
o Diffie-Hellman key exchange (diffie-hellman-group1-sha1 as defined in section 6.1 of
[SSH-TRANS]) (SC1.3)
o The keyed hash function hmac-sha1 for integrity protection as defined in section 4.4 of
[SSH-TRANS] (which refers to [HMAC] for the exact definition of the algorithm) (SC1.4).
Note: The protocol supports more cryptographic algorithms than the ones listed above. Those
other algorithms are not covered by this evaluation and should be disabled or not used when
running the evaluated configuration.
2. Performing user authentication using the standard password based authentication method the TOE provides
for users (Password Authentication Method as defined in chapter 5 of [SSH-AUTH]) (SC1.5).
Note: The protocol also supports other authentication methods (e. g. certificate based
authentication) but those are not within the scope of this Security Target. This Security Target
requires password based authentication and therefore the SSH server should be configured to
accept this authentication method only.
3. Checking the integrity of the messages exchanged and close down the connection in case an integrity error
is detected (SC1.6).
7.2.9.1.2 The Secure Socket Layer Protocol
The TOE provides the Secure Socket Layer Protocol Version 3 (SSL v3) to allow users from a remote host to establish
a secure channel to the TOE. In contrast to the Secure Shell protocol described above, the SSL protocol does not
support user authentication as part of the protocol. The SSL protocol within the TOE also allows to tunnel other TCP
based protocols (that satisfy the restrictions defined in the Evaluated Configuration Guide) securely between a client
and a server system.
The following table documents implementation details concerning the OpenSSL implementation’s compliance to the
relevant standards. It addresses areas where the standards permit different implementation choices such as optional
features.
Table 7-3: SSL implementation notes
Reference Description Implementation details
[SSLv3] 5.5 Handshake protocol
overview: certificates
The evaluated configuration always uses server certificates. Use
of client certificates is optional.
[SSLv3] D.1 Temporary RSA keys Not applicable, the evaluated configuration does not limit the
size of encryption keys to 512 bits.
[SSLv3] D.2 Random Number
Generation and Seeding
OpenSSL uses data from the /dev/urandom device, a persistent
entropy pool file, and volatile system statistics to seed the
PRNG.
Page 86 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
[SSLv3] D.3 Certificates and
authentication
The evaluated configuration supports verification of certificate
chains, the details are beyond the scope of this Security Target.
[SSLv3] D.4 CipherSuites The ciphers supported in the evaluated configuration are listed
below.
[SSLv3] D.5 FORTEZZA The FORTEZZA hardware encryption system is not supported
in the evaluated configuration.
[SSLv3] E. Version 2.0 Backward
Combatibility
The OpenSSL implementation supports the backwards
compatible protocol, but this is disabled in the evaluated
configuration. It permits use of SSLv3 exclusively.
[TLS-AES] CipherSuites The ciphers supported in the evaluated configuration are listed
below.
On the client as well as on the server side the Stunnel program can be used to tunnel non-SSL aware daemons and
protocols (such as POP, IMAP, LDAP, etc) by having Stunnel provide the encryption, requiring no changes to the
daemon's code. Stunnel acts as a trusted wrapper that can be used by applications implementing otherwise non-secure
protocols. Stunnel as part of the TSF will ensure that the user data transmitted by those applications over the network
will be confidentiality and integrity protected by the SSL v3 protocol. For guidance on how to set up such trusted
channel and how to use it by applications please see the Evaluated Configuration Guide.
The Stunnel daemon will be configured to support the following cypher suites defined in the SSL v3 protocol
[SSLv3] or RFC 3268 [TLS-AES]:
SSL_RSA_WITH_RC4_128_SHA
SSL_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA
TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA (SC1.7)
Other cypher suites as defined in [SSLv3] or [TLS-AES] are not supported in this Security Target and the TOE should
be configured to not support other cipher suites.
This implies that the following cryptographic algorithms from the library are used:
1. The RSA algorithm with 1024 bit modulus length. RSA is used for the exchange of the session key and for
server authentication.
2. RC4 with a key size of 128 bit (as one alternative for the symmetric encryption algorithm)
3. Triple DES with a key size of 168 bit
4. AES with a key size of 128 or 256 bit
5. SHA-1 (as the cryptographic hash function)
An implication of the use of this cipher suite and its algorithms is the authentication of the SSL server site using
digital certificates.
Note: The function to generate the RSA key pair used by the server is part of the TSF, but the generation of the
certificate of the public key is regarded as an aspect of the IT environment. A widely accepted Certification Authority
might be used to generate this certificate (allowing a wide community trusting this CA to validate the certificate). In a
closed community it might also be sufficient to have one server within the community to act as a CA. The OpenSSL
library provides the functions to set up such a CA, but those functions are not subject of this Security Target.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FCS_CKM.1 (1-3), FCS_CKM.2 (1-4), FCS_COP.1 (1-
3), FDP_UCT.1, FDP_UIT.1, FMT_MSA.2 and FTP_ITC.1.
7.2.10 TSF Protection (TP)
While in operation, the kernel software and data are protected by the hardware memory protection mechanisms
described in the high level design and the hardware reference manuals for the underlying hardware. The memory and
process management components of the kernel ensure a user process cannot access kernel storage or storage
belonging to other processes (TP1.1).
Non-kernel TSF software and data are protected by DAC and process isolation mechanisms. In the evaluated
configuration, type enforcement rules ensure that files that are part of the TSF database as well as files and directories
containing internal TSF data (e.g. batch job queues) are also protected from unauthorized modification and reading.
The type enforcement rules allow access to those files only to roles authorized for access to those types (TP1.2). In
addition DAC access control can be defined for additional protection.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 87 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
The TSF including the hardware and firmware components are required to be physically protected from unauthorized
access. The system kernel mediates all access to the hardware mechanisms themselves, other than program visible
CPU instruction functions and main storage defined by the kernel to be directly accessible by a user process.
The boot image for each host with the evaluated TOE in the networked system is adequately protected.
7.2.10.1 TSF Invocation Guarantees (TP.1)
All system protected resources are managed by the TSF. Because all TSF data structures are protected, these resources
can be directly manipulated only by the TSF, through defined TSF interfaces. This satisfies the condition that the TSF
must be "always invoked" to manipulate protected resources (TP1.3).
Resources managed by the kernel software can only be manipulated while running in kernel mode (TP1.4).
Processes run in user mode and can call functions of the kernel only as the result of an exception or interrupt (TP1.5).
The hardware and the kernel software handling these events and ensure that the kernel is entered only at pre-
determined locations, and within pre-determined parameters. All kernel managed resources are protected such that
only the kernel software is able to manipulate them.
Trusted processes implement resources managed outside the kernel. The trusted processes and the data defining the
resources are protected as described above depending on the type of interface. For directly invoked trusted processes
the program invocation mechanism ensures that the trusted process always starts in a protected environment at a
predetermined point (TP1.6). Other trusted process interfaces are started during system initialization and use well
defined protocol or file system mechanisms to receive requests (TP1.7).
Some system calls or parameter of system calls are reserved are reserved for trusted processes. When called the kernel
checks that the calling process runs with an effective userid of 0 (TP1.8).
The TOE includes the SELinux framework, and gets control via the LSM hooks in the kernel. With these hooks
SELinux gets control each time a named object or a process (as a subject) is created and each time a subject wants to
access a named object. SELinux attaches security attributes to each process and each named object and uses rules
defined in a policy file to define the default initial values of those attributes as well as to evaluate if a subject may be
granted access to an object. Those rules are evaluated in addition to the discretionary access control rules enforced by
other kernel subsystems (e. g. a subsystem implementing a file system).
In the evaluated configuration there are two different set of SELinux policy rules for the two modes of operation. In
CAPP mode the policy rules enforce the DAC policy with some additional restrictions beyond the scope of this ST. In
LSPP mode there are additional rules that define the sensitivity label based mandatory access control policy and the
role-based access control policy.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement ADV_ARC.1.
7.2.10.2 Kernel (TP.2)
The Red Hat Enterprise Linux software consists of a privileged kernel and a variety of non-kernel components
(trusted processes). The kernel operates on behalf of all processes (subjects).
The kernel runs in the CPU’s privileged mode and has access to all system memory. All kernel software, including
kernel extensions and kernel processes, execute with kernel privileges but only defined subsystems within the kernel
are part of the TSF. The kernel is entered by some event that causes a context switch such as a system call, I/O
interrupt, or a program exception condition.
Upon entry the kernel determines the function to be performed, performs it, and, when finished, performs another
context switch to return to user processing (eventually on behalf of a different subject) (TP2.1).
The kernel is shared by all processes, and manages system wide shared resources. It presents the primary
programming interface for Red Hat Enterprise Linux in the form of system calls.
Because the kernel is shared among all processes, any process running "in the kernel" (that is, running in privileged
hardware state as the result of a context switch) is able to directly reference the data structures that implement shared
resources.
The major components of the kernel are memory management, process management, the file system, the system call
interface, and the device drivers.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement ADV_ARC.1.
7.2.10.3 Kernel Modules (TP.3)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux supports dynamically loadable kernel modules that are loaded automatically on demand.
Kernel modules are actually a part of the kernel that is not resident but loaded as part of the kernel when needed
Page 88 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
(TP3.1). Whenever a program wants the kernel to use a feature that is only available as a loadable module, and if the
kernel hasn't got the module installed yet, the kernel will take care of the situation and make the best of it (TP3.2).
This is what happens:
 The kernel notices that a feature is requested that is not resident in the kernel.
 The kernel uses modprobe to load a module that fits this symbolic description.
 modprobe looks into its internal "alias" translation table to see if there is a match. This table can be
reconfigured and expanded by having "alias" lines in "/etc/modprobe.conf".
 modprobe is then asked to insert the module(s) that it has decided that the kernel needs. Every module will
be configured according to the "options" lines in "/etc/modprobe.conf".
 modprobe exits and tells the kernel that the request succeeded (or failed...)
 The kernel uses the freshly installed feature just as if it had been configured into the kernel as a "resident"
part.
(TP3.3)
In the TOE Kernel modules will be not be automatically removed from the kernel when they have not been used for a
period of time. Removing them from the kernel needs to be done explicitly.
A specific kind of kernel module is SELinux which is implemented as a kernel module of the LSM (Linux Security
Module) framework. This framework provides a large number of hooks in the Linux kernel where an LSM can
intercept kernel functions and perform additional checks or define and manage the security context of a task or an
object. Contrary to other loadable security modules, SELinux is already compiled into the kernel. The SELinux part of
the TOE uses those hooks to implement the role-based and mandatory access control policies definable using a policy
file, which is separately compiled and then loaded at system boot time.
The TOE ensures that every process is running in a “security domain” and every protected resource has a “type”
associated with it. Policy rules define the actions a domain can perform on a type. User roles are defined by the
domains a user can use. When in LSPP mode the TOE has a policy file which also includes the rules that define
classical mandatory access control for controlling information flow as well as different roles in line with the
requirements of a general role-based access control model.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement ADV_ARC.1.
7.2.10.4 Trusted Processes (TP.4)
Trusted processes in Red Hat Enterprise Linux are processes running in user mode but with root privileges.
A trusted process is distinguished from other user processes by the ability to affect the security policy. Some trusted
processes implement security policies directly (e.g., identification and authentication) but many are trusted simply
because they operate in an environment that confers the ability to access TSF data (e.g., programs run by
administrative users or during system initialization).
Trusted processes have all the kernel interfaces available for their use, but are limited to kernel-provided mechanisms
for communication and data sharing, such as files for data storage and pipes, sockets and signals for communication.
The major functions implemented with trusted processes include user login(identification and authentication), batch
processing, some network operations, system initialization, and system administration.
The kernel will check for each system call that requires root privileges if the process that issued the call has those
privileges (TP4.1). If not, the kernel will refuse to perform the system call. The kernel will also check for each access
to an object protected by the any of DAC mechanism, if the process has the required access rights for the attempted
type of access.
Any program executed with root privileges has the ability to perform the actions of a trusted process. It is therefore
important that a site operating a Red Hat Enterprise Linux system strictly controls those programs and prohibits that
those programs are modified or that programs from untrusted sources are executed with root privileges (TP4.2).
Trusted processes are not part of the kernel and (except for those processes that perform system initialization and
identification and authentication) not part of the TSF itself.
Trusted processes provide a contribution to security management and identification and authentication. For
identification and authentication they contribute to satisfy the security functional requirements FIA_UAU.2,
FIA_UAU.7 and FIA_UID.2.
This function also contributes to ADV_ARC.1.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 89 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.10.5 TSF Databases (TP.5)
Table 6-3 identifies the primary TSF databases used in Red Hat Enterprise Linux and their purpose. These are listed
both as individual files (by pathname) or collections of files.
With the exception of databases listed with the User attribute (which indicates that a user can read, but not write, the
file), all of these databases shall only be accessible to administrative users. None of these databases shall be
modifiable by a user other than an administrative user.
Those databases are part of the file system and therefore the file system protection mechanisms of the TOE have to be
used to protect those databases from unauthorized access. It is the task of the persons responsible for setting up and
administrating the system to ensure that the access control features of the TOE are used throughout the lifetime of the
system to protect those databases.
Each host system within the TOE maintains its own TSF database. Synchronizing those databases is not performed in
the evaluated configuration. If such synchronization is required by an organization it is the responsibility of an
administrative user of the TOE to achieve this either manually or with some automated assistance.
Table 7-4: Administrative Databases. This table lists other administrative files used to configure the TSF.
Database Purpose
/etc/audit/audit.rules defines filters for auditable event record generation
/etc/audit/auditd.conf configuration settings for audit subsystem operation (such as
audit trace file location and disk space thresholds)
/etc/cron.{ weekly hourly daily
monthly}
contains programs to be scheduled by the cron daemon on a
weekly, hourly, daily or monthly schedule
/etc/cron.allow File containing users allowed to use crontab
/etc/cron.d/* contains programs to be scheduled by the cron daemon
/etc/cron.deny File containing users not allowed to use crontab. Evaluated
only if no /etc/cron.allow exists. If an empty /etc/cron.deny
exists and no ”allow” file exists, all users are allowed to use
crontab.
/etc/crontab commands to be scheduled by the cron daemon
/etc/group Stores group names, supplemental GIDs, and group members
for all system groups.
/etc/gshadow Stores group passwords and group administrator information
/etc/hosts Contains hostnames and their address for hosts in the network.
This file is used to resolve a hostname into an Internet address
in the absence of a domain name server
/etc/inittab Describes the process started by init program at different run
levels
/etc/ld.so.conf File containing a list of colon, space, tab, newline, or comma
separated directories in which to search for libraries for run-
time link bindings
/etc/localtime Defines the local time zone information used for date/time
input and display
/etc/login.defs Defines various configuration options for the login process
/etc/modprobe.conf Configuration file for modprobe. Modprobe automatically
loads or unloads a module while taking into account its
dependencies.
/etc/netlabel.rules This file contains the rules for the Netlabel subsystem
Each line contains just the arguments to the netlabel command
/etc/pam.d/* This directory contains the configuration of PAM. In it there is
one configuration for each application that performs
identification and authorization. Each of the configuration file
contains the PAM modules that are to be used for this
procedure.
/etc/passwd Stores user names, user Ids, primary group ID, user real name,
home directory, shell for all system users.
/etc/racoon/racoon.conf Configuration file for the racoon IKE daemon, including
security association definitions and security policy
/etc/rc.d/init.d/* System startup scripts
/etc/rc.d/init.d/auditd startup script for the audit system
/etc/securetty Contains device names of tty lines on which root is allowed to
login
/etc/security/opasswd Contains the password history for check of reuse of old
passwords
Page 90 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
Database Purpose
/etc/selinux/config Defines active policy
/etc/selinux/mls/contexts/ Default file contexts
/etc/selinux/mls/modules/ Folder for the policy modules in LSPP mode
/etc/selinux/mls/policy/ Folder for the policy in LSPP mode
/etc/selinux/mls/setrans.conf MLS label translations from internal to admin defined names
/etc/selinux/mls/seusers User sensitivity labels (clearances)
/etc/selinux/semanage.conf Configuration for the semanage tool
/etc/shadow Defines user passwords in one-way encrypted form, plus
additional characteristics
/etc/ssh/sshd_config Contains ssh configuration parameter for the ssh server
/etc/stunnel/stunnel.conf Configuration file for stunnel service (location is configurable)
/etc/stunnel/stunnel.pem File with certificate and private key for stunnel service
(location is configurable)
/etc/sysconfig/* Directory containing several configuration files for network
services
/etc/sysctl.conf Defines kernel parameters
/etc/vsftpd.ftpusers contains users not allowed to remotely access the system using
the FTP protocol (Server only)
/etc/vsftpd/vsftpd.conf Contains configuration parameter for the vsftp server (Server
only)
/etc/xinetd.conf Main configuration file for xinetd
/etc/xinetd.d/* Subsidiary configuration files for xinetd, read from xinetd.conf
/var/log/lastlog Stores time and date of last successful login attempt for each
user.
/var/log/tallylog Stores number of unsuccessful login attempts for each user.
/var/spool/cron/root Crontab file for the root user
These tables are not functions but they are part of the management of the TSF. As such they contribute to the system
management security functional requirements FMT_MSA.3 and FMT_MTD.1 (Management of User
Attributes;Authentication Data; and Roles), FMT_MTD.3, FMT_SMR.2, and FMT_SMF.1.
7.2.10.6 Internal TOE Protection Mechanisms (TP.6)
All kernel software has access to all of memory, and the ability to execute all instructions. In general, however, only
memory containing kernel data structures is manipulated by kernel software. Parameters are copied to and from
process storage (i.e., that accessible outside the kernel) by explicit internal mechanisms, and those interfaces only refer
to storage belonging to the process that invoked the kernel (e.g., by a system call). Functions implemented in trusted
processes are more strongly isolated than the kernel. Because there is no explicit sharing of data, as there is in the
kernel address space, all communications and interactions between trusted processes take place explicitly through files
and similar mechanisms.
This encourages an architecture in which specific TSF functions are implemented by well-defined groups of
processes.
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement ADV_ARC.1.
7.2.10.7 Testing the TOE Protection Mechanisms (TP.7)
The TOE provides a tool for the system administrator that allows him to test the correct functions of the protection
features of the underlying abstract machine. This tool performs tests on
 the main memory (to check for failures in the memory hardware) (TP7.1)
 the processor (to check the functions of the memory management unit and the separation between user and
kernel mode) (TP7.2)
 I/O devices (to check for correct operation of some I/O devices including the hard disks and the firmware
used to access the disks) (TP7.3)
The tool generates a report on the tests performed and the results that those test had. The report is
generated in human readable format and may be stored in a file or directed to a printer (TP7.4).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FPT_AMT.1.
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 91 of 93
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
7.2.10.8 Testing the TSF Mechanisms (TP.8)
The TOE provides a tool for the system administrator that allows him to run a system self test to demonstrate correct
operation of the TSF. This tool performs tests on
 the integrity of TSF data, including the SELinux policy (TP8.1)
 the integrity of stored TSF executable code (TP8.2)
 correct operation of the DAC mechanism (TP8.3)
 In LSPP mode: correct operation of the MAC mechanism (TP8.4)
The tool generates a report on the tests performed and the results that those test had. The report is
generated in human readable format and may be stored in a file or directed to a printer (TP8.5).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirement FPT_TST.1.
7.2.10.9 Secure failure state (TP.9)
The system provides a single user maintenance mode. If an operation on the SELinux policy fails, such as
any libselinux operation that requires access to the policy or role information, the operation is aborted
(TP9.1) and the system will automatically enter single user mode (TP9.2).
In single user mode, all interactive user sessions are terminated and all system daemons that can run tasks
on a user’s behalf (crond) are unavailable (TP9.3).
An authorized system administrator can use the system console to interact with the system and re-enter
normal multiuser mode (TP9.4).
This function contributes to satisfy the security requirements FPT_FLS.1, FPT_RCV.1, FPT_RCV.4, and
ADV_ARC.1.
Page 92 of 93 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 2008­03­31
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Version 5.1 Security Target for CAPP, RBAC and LSPP Compliance
8 Abbreviations
ACL Access Control List
AIX Advanced Interactive Executive
ANSI American National Standards Institute
CAPP Controlled Access Protection Profile
CC Common Criteria
CD Compact Disc
CPU Central Processing Unit
DAC Discretionary Access Control
DVD Digital Versatile Disc
FPR Floating Point Register
FSO File System Object
FTP File Transfer Protocol
GPR General Purpose Register
ID Identifier
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
IP Internet Protocol
IPC Inter-Process Communication
LAN Local Area Network
ISO International Organization for Standardization
MD5 Message Digest 5
PAM Pluggable Authentication Module
PDF Portable Data Format
PP Protection Profile
RHEL Red Hat Enterprise Linux
SSH Secure Shell
ST Security Target
TCP Transmission Control Protocol
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSC TSF Scope of Control (the set of interactions that can
occur with or within a TOE and are subject to the rules
of the TSP)
TSF TOE Security Functions
UDP User Datagram Protocol
VFS Virtual File System
VMM Virtual Memory Manager
2008-03-31 © SGI, atsec 2007, 2008 Page 93 of 93