UNCLASSIFIED
COMMON CRITERIA
CERTIFICATION REPORT
EMC RecoverPoint® v4.4 SP1
19 May 2016
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 2
FOREWORD
This certification report is an UNCLASSIFIED publication, issued under the authority of the Chief,
Communications Security Establishment (CSE). Suggestions for amendments should be forwarded through
departmental communications security channels to your Client Services Representative at CSE.
The Information Technology (IT) product identified in this certification report, and its associated certificate, has
been evaluated at an approved evaluation facility – established under the Canadian Common Criteria Scheme –
using the Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4, for
conformance to the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4.
This certification report, and its associated certificate, applies only to the identified version and release of the
product in its evaluated configuration. The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of
the Canadian CC Scheme, and the conclusions of the evaluation facility in the evaluation report are consistent
with the evidence adduced. This report, and its associated certificate, are not an endorsement of the IT product
by the Communications Security Establishment, or any other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this
report, and its associated certificate, and no warranty for the IT product by the Communications Security
Establishment, or any other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this report, and its associated
certificate, is either expressed or implied.
If your department has identified a requirement for this certification report based on business needs and would
like more detailed information, please contact:
ITS Client Services
Telephone: (613) 991-7654
E-mail: itsclientservices@cse-cst.gc.ca
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 3
OVERVIEW
The Canadian Common Criteria Scheme provides a third-party evaluation service for determining the
trustworthiness of Information Technology (IT) security products. Evaluations are performed by a commercial
Common Criteria Evaluation Facility (CCEF) under the oversight of the Certification Body, which is managed by
the Communications Security Establishment.
A CCEF is a commercial facility that has been approved by the Certification Body to perform Common Criteria
evaluations; a significant requirement for such approval is accreditation to the requirements of ISO/IEC
17025:2005, the General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories.
Accreditation is performed under the Program for the Accreditation of Laboratories - Canada (PALCAN),
administered by the Standards Council of Canada.
The CCEF that carried out this evaluation is EWA-Canada.
By awarding a Common Criteria certificate, the CCS Certification Body asserts that the product complies with the
security requirements specified in the associated security target. A security target is a requirements specification
document that defines the scope of the evaluation activities. The consumer of certified IT products should
review the security target, in addition to this certification report, in order to gain an understanding of any
assumptions made during the evaluation, the IT product's intended environment, the evaluated security
functionality, and the testing and analysis conducted by the CCEF.
The certification report, certificate of product evaluation and security target are posted to the Certified Products
list (CPL) for the Canadian CC Scheme, and to the Common Criteria portal (the official website of the
International Common Criteria Project).
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................................5
1 Identification of Target of Evaluation......................................................................................................6
1.1 Common Criteria Conformance..................................................................................................................6
1.2 TOE description ..........................................................................................................................................6
1.3 TOE architecture.........................................................................................................................................7
2 Security policy .......................................................................................................................................8
3 Assumptions and Clarifications of Scope.................................................................................................8
3.1 Usage and Environmental assumptions .....................................................................................................8
4 Evaluated Configuration.........................................................................................................................9
4.1 Documentation...........................................................................................................................................9
5 Evaluation Analysis Activities ...............................................................................................................10
5.1 Development........................................................................................................................................... 10
5.2 Guidance Documents .............................................................................................................................. 10
5.3 Life-cycle Support.................................................................................................................................... 10
6 Testing Activities..................................................................................................................................11
6.1 Assessment of Developer Tests............................................................................................................... 11
6.2 Conduct of Testing................................................................................................................................... 11
6.3 Independent Functional Testing.............................................................................................................. 11
6.4 Independent Penetration Testing ........................................................................................................... 12
7 Results of the Evaluation......................................................................................................................13
8 Supporting Content..............................................................................................................................14
8.1 List of Abbreviations................................................................................................................................ 14
8.2 References............................................................................................................................................... 15
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 TOE Architecture ....................................................................................................................................7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 TOE Identification.......................................................................................................................................6
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EMC RecoverPoint® v4.4 SP1(hereafter referred to as the Target of Evaluation (TOE)), from EMC Corporation, is
the Target of Evaluation. The results of this evaluation demonstrate that TOE meets the requirements of the
conformance claim listed in Table 1 for the evaluated security functionality.
The TOE is an appliance-based product that provides real-time, block-level data replication for systems and
devices in an enterprise storage area network (SAN) environment. The TOE runs on an out-of-band
RecoverPoint Appliance (RPA). It is also possible to run RPA software as a virtual appliance on VMware
infrastructure; this is referred to as a virtual RPA (vRPA). The functionality of RPAs and vRPAs is the same.
Replication can be performed locally, remotely, or both. With local replication, a SAN connects systems and
devices to a local RPA for replication designed to allow operational recovery from logical corruptions such as
human errors or viruses. With remote replication, geographically dispersed SANs are connected by two or
more RPA clusters, allowing recovery primarily from geographical or site disasters.
EWA-Canada is the CCEF that conducted the evaluation. This evaluation was completed on 19 May 2016 and
was carried out in accordance with the rules of the Canadian Common Criteria Scheme.
The scope of the evaluation is defined by the security target, which identifies assumptions made during the
evaluation, the intended environment for TOE, and the security functional/assurance requirements. Consumers
are advised to verify that their operating environment is consistent with that specified in the security target, and
to give due consideration to the comments, observations and recommendations in this certification report.
Communications Security Establishment, as the Certification Body, declares that the TOE evaluation meets all
the conditions of the Arrangement on the Recognition of Common Criteria Certificates and that the product will
be listed on the Certified Products list (CPL) and the Common Criteria portal (the official website of the
International Common Criteria Project).
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 6
1 IDENTIFICATION OF TARGET OF EVALUATION
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is identified as follows:
Table 1 TOE Identification
TOE Name and Version EMC RecoverPoint® v4.4 SP1
Developer EMC Corporation
Conformance Claim EAL 2 + ALC_FLR.2
1.1 COMMON CRITERIA CONFORMANCE
The evaluation was conducted using the Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
Version 3.1 Revision 4, for conformance to the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
Version 3.1 Revision 4.
1.2 TOE DESCRIPTION
The TOE is an appliance-based product that provides real-time, block-level data replication for systems and
devices in an enterprise storage area network (SAN) environment. The TOE runs on an out-of-band
RecoverPoint Appliance (RPA), It is also possible to run RPA software as a virtual appliance on VMware
infrastructure; this is referred to as a virtual RPA (vRPA). The functionality of RPAs and vRPAs is the same.
Replication can be performed locally, remotely, or both. With local replication, a SAN connects systems and
devices to a local RPA for replication designed to allow operational recovery from logical corruptions such as
human errors or viruses. With remote replication, geographically dispersed SANs are connected by two or
more RPA clusters, allowing recovery primarily from geographical or site disasters.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 7
1.3 TOE ARCHITECTURE
A diagram of an example TOE architecture is as follows:
Figure 1 TOE Architecture
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 8
2 SECURITY POLICY
The TOE implements policies pertaining to the following security functional classes:
• Security Audit;
• Volume Replication;
• Identification and Identification;
• Security Management; and
• TOE Access.
Complete details of the security functional requirements (SFRs) can be found in the Security Target (ST).
3 ASSUMPTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS OF SCOPE
Consumers of the TOE should consider assumptions about usage and environmental settings as requirements
for the product’s installation and its operating environment. This will ensure the proper and secure operation of
the TOE.
3.1 USAGE AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions are made regarding the use and deployment of the TOE:
• There will be one or more competent individuals assigned to manage the TOE and the security of the
information it contains;
• The SAN devices will be interconnected by a segregated SAN that protects the traffic from disclosure to
or modification by untrusted systems or users;
• The authorized administrators are not careless, willfully negligent, or hostile, and will follow and abide
by the instructions provided by the TOE documentation; and
• The hardware and software critical to TOE security policy enforcement will be protected from
unauthorized physical modification.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 9
4 EVALUATED CONFIGURATION
The evaluated configuration for the TOE comprises:
• Two to Five clusters, each including two to 8 RPA’s (Recoverpoint Appliance) running the software
Recoverpoint 4.4 SP1 on Gen5 Hardware appliance; or
• Two to Five clusters, each including two to 8 vRPA’s (VMware virtual Recoverpoint Appliance) running
the software Recoverpoint 4.4 SP1 on ESXi systems.
For hardware RPAs, the Gen5 appliance hardware and RecoverPoint software are included in the TOE
boundary. When a vRPA is used, only the RecoverPoint software is included in the TOE boundary; the ESXi
hardware and hypervisor are not part of the TOE.
4.1 DOCUMENTATION
The following documents are provided to the consumer to assist in the configuration and installation of the TOE:
• EMC RecoverPoint Installation and Deployment Guide;
• EMC RecoverPoint Version 4.4 Administrator’s Guide;
• EMC RecoverPoint Release 4.4 CLI Reference Guide;
• EMC RecoverPoint Release number 4.4 Release Notes;
• EMC RecoverPoint Release number 4.4 Security Configuration Guide; and
• EMC RecoverPoint 4.4 Common Criteria Supplement.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 10
5 EVALUATION ANALYSIS ACTIVITIES
The evaluation analysis activities involved a structured evaluation of the TOE. Documentation and process
dealing with Development, Guidance Documents, and Life-Cycle Support were evaluated.
5.1 DEVELOPMENT
The evaluators analyzed the TOE functional specification and design documentation; they determined that the
design completely and accurately describes the TOE security functionality (TSF) interfaces, the TSF subsystems
and how the TSF implements the security functional requirements (SFRs). The evaluators analyzed the TOE
security architectural description and determined that the initialization process is secure, that the security
functions are protected against tamper and bypass, and that security domains are maintained. The evaluators
also independently verified that the correspondence mappings between the design documents are correct.
5.2 GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS
The evaluators examined the TOE preparative user guidance and operational user guidance and determined that
it sufficiently and unambiguously describes how to securely transform the TOE into its evaluated configuration
and how to use and administer the product. The evaluators examined and tested the preparative and
operational guidance, and determined that they are complete and sufficiently detailed to result in a secure
configuration.
Section 4.1 provides details on the guidance documents.
5.3 LIFE-CYCLE SUPPORT
An analysis of the TOE configuration management system and associated documentation was performed. The
evaluators found that the TOE configuration items were clearly marked.
The evaluators examined the delivery documentation and determined that it described all of the procedures
required to maintain the integrity of the TOE during distribution to the consumer.
The evaluators reviewed the flaw remediation procedures used by developer for the TOE. The evaluators
concluded that the procedures are adequate to track and correct security flaws, and distribute the flaw
information and corrections to consumers of the TOE.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 11
6 TESTING ACTIVITIES
Testing consists of the following three steps: assessing developer tests, performing independent functional tests,
and performing penetration tests.
6.1 ASSESSMENT OF DEVELOPER TESTS
The evaluators verified that the developer has met their testing responsibilities by examining their test evidence,
and reviewing their test results, as documented in the ETR.
The evaluators analyzed the developer’s test coverage analysis and found it to be complete and accurate. The
correspondence between the tests identified in the developer’s test documentation and the functional
specification was complete.
6.2 CONDUCT OF TESTING
The TOE was subjected to a comprehensive suite of formally documented, independent functional and
penetration tests. The detailed testing activities, including configurations, procedures, test cases, expected
results and observed results are documented in a separate Test Results document.
6.3 INDEPENDENT FUNCTIONAL TESTING
During this evaluation, the evaluator developed independent functional tests by examining design and guidance
documentation.
All testing was planned and documented to a sufficient level of detail to allow repeatability of the testing
procedures and results. The following testing activities were performed:
a. Initialization: The objective of this test goal is to confirm that the TOE can be installed and configured
into the evaluated configuration;
b. Repeat of Developer's Tests: The evaluator repeated a subset of the developers tests;
c. Fail over: The objective of this test goal is to demonstrate that the TOE can fail over from one location to
another without losing any data;
d. Multiple Admins: The objective of this test goal is to demonstrate that multiple administrators will not
interfere with each other while managing the TOE; and
e. Security level: The objective of this test goal is to confirm that the TOE can enforce strong password
composition for new and current users.
6.3.1 FUNCTIONAL TEST RESULTS
The developer’s tests and the independent functional tests yielded the expected results, providing assurance
that the TOE behaves as specified in its ST and functional specification.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 12
6.4 INDEPENDENT PENETRATION TESTING
Subsequent to the independent review of public domain vulnerability databases and all evaluation deliverables,
limited independent evaluator penetration testing was conducted. The penetration tests focused on:
a. Use of automated vulnerability scanning tools to discover potential network, platform and application
layer vulnerabilities; and
b. Nexpose scan: The objective of this test goal is to detect if the TOE is vulnerable to GHOST, FREAK,
Heartbleed, POODLE, or Shellshock.
6.4.1 PENETRATION TEST RESULTS
The independent penetration testing did not uncover any exploitable vulnerabilities in the intended operating
environment.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 13
7 RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION
This evaluation has provided the basis for the conformance claim documented in Table 1. The overall verdict for
the evaluation is PASS. These results are supported by evidence in the ETR.
The IT product identified in this report has been evaluated at an approved evaluation facility established under
the Canadian Common Criteria Evaluation and Certification Scheme using the Common Methodology for IT
Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4, for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation,
Version 3.1 Revision 4. These evaluation results apply only to the specific version and release of the product in
its evaluated configuration and in conjunction with the complete certification report.
The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Canadian Common Criteria
Evaluation and Certification Scheme and the conclusions of the evaluation facility in the evaluation report are
consistent with the evidence adduced. This is not an endorsement of the IT product by CSE or by any other
organization that recognizes or gives effect to this certificate, and no warranty of the IT product by CSE or by any
other organization that recognizes or gives effect to this certificate, is expressed or implied.
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 14
8 SUPPORTING CONTENT
8.1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Term Definition
CAVP Cryptographic Algorithm Validation Program
CCEF Common Criteria Evaluation Facility
CCS Canadian Common Criteria Evaluation and Certification Scheme
CM Configuration Management
CMVP Cryptographic Module Validation Program
CSE Communications Security Establishment
EAL Evaluation Assurance Level
ETR Evaluation Technical Report
FC Fibre Channel
GC Government of Canada
IT Information Technology
ITS Information Technology Security
ITSET Information Technology Security Evaluation and Testing
PALCAN Program for the Accreditation of Laboratories – Canada
PP Protection Profile
RPA RecoverPoint Appliance
SAN Storage Area Network
SFR Security Functional Requirement
ST Security Target
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSF TOE Security Function
vRPA Virtual RecoverPoint Appliance
UNCLASSIFIED
version 0.5 15
8.2 REFERENCES
Reference
CCS Publication #4, Technical Oversight, Version 1.8, October 2010.
Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1 Revision 4, September 2012.
Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation, CEM, Version 3.1 Revision 4,
September 2012.
EMC RecoverPoint® v4.4 Security Target, version 0.9, 16 May 2016.
Evaluation Technical Report for EMC Corporation RecoverPoint® v4.4, version 1.2, 19 May 2016.