BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
for
ZEMO VML-GK2 HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0
from
ZEMO GmbH
BSI - Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik, Postfach 20 03 63, D-53133 Bonn
Phone +49 (0)228 99 9582-0, Fax +49 (0)228 9582-5477, Infoline +49 (0)228 99 9582-111
Certification Report V1.0 CC-Zert-327 V5.47
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 (*)
eHealth: Smart Card Readers
ZEMO VML-GK2
HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0
from ZEMO GmbH
PP Conformance: Common Criteria Protection Profile Mobile Card
Terminal for the German Healthcare System
(MobCT), Version 1.4, BSI-CC-PP-0052-2015, 24
September 2014
Functionality: PP conformant
Common Criteria Part 2 extended
Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant
EAL 3 augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_IMP.1,
ADV_TDS.3, ALC_TAT.1, AVA_VAN.5
valid until: 7 May 2029
The IT Product identified in this certificate has been evaluated at an approved evaluation
facility using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1
extended by Scheme Interpretations for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT
Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.1. CC and CEM are also published as ISO/IEC 15408
and ISO/IEC 18045.
(*) This certificate applies only to the specific version and release of the product in its
evaluated configuration and in conjunction with the complete Certification Report and
Notification. For details on the validity see Certification Report part A chapter 5.
The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the certification
scheme of the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) and the conclusions
of the evaluation facility in the evaluation technical report are consistent with the
evidence adduced.
This certificate is not an endorsement of the IT Product by the Federal Office for
Information Security or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this
certificate, and no warranty of the IT Product by the Federal Office for Information
Security or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this certificate, is
either expressed or implied.
Bonn, 8 May 2024
For the Federal Office for Information Security
Matthias Intemann L.S.
Head of Section
SOGIS
Recognition Agreement
for components up to
EAL 4
Common Criteria
Recognition Arrangement
recognition for components
up to EAL 2 and ALC_FLR
only
Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik
Godesberger Allee 185-189 - D-53175 Bonn - Postfach 20 03 63 - D-53133 Bonn
Phone +49 (0)228 99 9582-0 - Fax +49 (0)228 9582-5477 - Infoline +49 (0)228 99 9582-111
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
This page is intentionally left blank.
4 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
Contents
A. Certification.....................................................................................................................6
1. Preliminary Remarks....................................................................................................6
2. Specifications of the Certification Procedure...............................................................6
3. Recognition Agreements..............................................................................................7
4. Performance of Evaluation and Certification................................................................8
5. Validity of the Certification Result................................................................................8
6. Publication...................................................................................................................9
B. Certification Results......................................................................................................10
1. Executive Summary...................................................................................................11
2. Identification of the TOE.............................................................................................12
3. Security Policy...........................................................................................................14
4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope.....................................................................14
5. Architectural Information............................................................................................14
6. Documentation...........................................................................................................15
7. IT Product Testing......................................................................................................15
8. Evaluated Configuration.............................................................................................17
9. Results of the Evaluation...........................................................................................18
10. Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE.....................................................19
11. Security Target.........................................................................................................19
12. Regulation specific aspects (eIDAS, QES)..............................................................19
13. Definitions................................................................................................................19
14. Bibliography.............................................................................................................21
C. Excerpts from the Criteria.............................................................................................22
D. Annexes........................................................................................................................23
5 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
A. Certification
1. Preliminary Remarks
Under the BSIG1
Act, the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) has the task of
issuing certificates for information technology products.
Certification of a product is carried out on the instigation of the vendor or a distributor,
hereinafter called the sponsor.
A part of the procedure is the technical examination (evaluation) of the product according
to the security criteria published by the BSI or generally recognised security criteria.
The evaluation is normally carried out by an evaluation facility recognised by the BSI or by
BSI itself.
The result of the certification procedure is the present Certification Report. This report
contains among others the certificate (summarised assessment) and the detailed
Certification Results.
The Certification Results contain the technical description of the security functionality of
the certified product, the details of the evaluation (strength and weaknesses) and
instructions for the user.
2. Specifications of the Certification Procedure
The certification body conducts the procedure according to the criteria laid down in the
following:
● Act on the Federal Office for Information Security1
● BSI Certification and Approval Ordinance2
● BMI Regulations on Ex-parte Costs 3
● Special decrees issued by the Bundesministerium des Innern und für Heimat (Federal
Ministry of the Interior and Community)
● DIN EN ISO/IEC 17065 standard
● BSI certification: Scheme documentation describing the certification process (CC-
Produkte) [3]
● BSI certification: Scheme documentation on requirements for the Evaluation Facility, its
approval and licencing process (CC-Stellen) [3]
● Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (CC), Version 3.14
[1] also published as
ISO/IEC 15408
1
Act on the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI-Gesetz - BSIG) of 14 August 2009,
Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 2821
2
Ordinance on the Procedure for Issuance of Security Certificates and approval by the Federal Office for
Information Security (BSI-Zertifizierungs- und -Anerkennungsverordnung - BSIZertV) of 17 December
2014, Bundesgesetzblatt 2014, part I, no. 61, p. 2231
3
BMI Regulations on Ex-parte Costs - Besondere Gebührenverordnung des BMI für individuell
zurechenbare öffentliche Leistungen in dessen Zuständigkeitsbereich (BMIBGebV), Abschnitt 7 (BSI-
Gesetz) - dated 2 September 2019, Bundesgesetzblatt I p. 1365
6 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
● Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1 [2] also published
as ISO/IEC 18045
● BSI certification: Application Notes and Interpretation of the Scheme (AIS) [4]
3. Recognition Agreements
In order to avoid multiple certification of the same product in different countries a mutual
recognition of IT security certificates - as far as such certificates are based on ITSEC or
CC - under certain conditions was agreed.
3.1. European Recognition of CC – Certificates (SOGIS-MRA)
The SOGIS-Mutual Recognition Agreement (SOGIS-MRA) Version 3 became effective in
April 2010. It defines the recognition of certificates for IT-Products at a basic recognition
level and, in addition, at higher recognition levels for IT-Products related to certain SOGIS
Technical Domains only.
The basic recognition level includes Common Criteria (CC) Evaluation Assurance Levels
EAL 1 to EAL 4. For "Smartcards and similar devices" a SOGIS Technical Domain is in
place. For "HW Devices with Security Boxes" a SOGIS Technical Domains is in place, too.
In addition, certificates issued for Protection Profiles based on Common Criteria are part of
the recognition agreement.
The current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes, details on
recognition, and the history of the agreement can be seen on the website at
https://www.sogis.eu.
The SOGIS-MRA logo printed on the certificate indicates that it is recognised under the
terms of this agreement by the related bodies of the signatory nations. A disclaimer
beneath the logo indicates the specific scope of recognition.
This certificate is recognized according to the rules of SOGIS-MRA, i.e. up to and including
CC part 3 EAL 4 components. The evaluation contained the component AVA_VAN.5 that is
not mutually recognised in accordance with the provisions of the SOGIS MRA. For mutual
recognition the EAL 4 components of these assurance families are relevant.
3.2. International Recognition of CC – Certificates (CCRA)
The international arrangement on the mutual recognition of certificates based on the CC
(Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement, CCRA-2014) has been ratified on 08
September 2014. It covers CC certificates based on collaborative Protection Profiles (cPP)
(exact use), CC certificates based on assurance components up to and including EAL 2 or
the assurance family Flaw Remediation (ALC_FLR) and CC certificates for Protection
Profiles and for collaborative Protection Profiles (cPP).
The current list of signatory nations and approved certification schemes can be seen on
the website: https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org.
The Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement logo printed on the certificate indicates
that this certification is recognised under the terms of this agreement by the related bodies
of the signatory nations. A disclaimer beneath the logo indicates the specific scope of
recognition.
4
Proclamation of the Bundesministerium des Innern und für Heimat of 12 February 2007 in the
Bundesanzeiger dated 23 February 2007, p. 3730
7 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
This certificate is recognized according to the rules of CCRA-2014, i. e. up to and including
CC part 3 EAL 2 and ALC_FLR components.
4. Performance of Evaluation and Certification
The certification body monitors each individual evaluation to ensure a uniform procedure, a
uniform interpretation of the criteria and uniform ratings.
The product ZEMO VML-GK2, HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0 has undergone the certification
procedure at BSI.
The evaluation of the product ZEMO VML-GK2, HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0 was conducted by
TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH. The evaluation was completed on 2 April 2024. TÜV
Informationstechnik GmbH is an evaluation facility (ITSEF)5
recognised by the certification
body of BSI.
For this certification procedure the sponsor and applicant is: ZEMO GmbH.
The product was developed by: ZEMO GmbH.
The certification is concluded with the comparability check and the production of this
Certification Report. This work was completed by the BSI.
5. Validity of the Certification Result
This Certification Report applies only to the version of the product as indicated. The
confirmed assurance package is valid on the condition that
● all stipulations regarding generation, configuration and operation, as given in the
following report, are observed,
● the product is operated in the environment described, as specified in the following report
and in the Security Target.
For the meaning of the assurance components and assurance levels please refer to CC
itself. Detailed references are listed in part C of this report.
The Certificate issued confirms the assurance of the product claimed in the Security Target
at the date of certification. As attack methods evolve over time, the resistance of the
certified version of the product against new attack methods needs to be re-assessed.
Therefore, the sponsor should apply for the certified product being monitored within the
assurance continuity program of the BSI Certification Scheme (e.g. by a re-assessment or
re-certification). Specifically, if results of the certification are used in subsequent evaluation
and certification procedures, in a system integration process or if a user's risk
management needs regularly updated results, it is recommended to perform a re-
assessment on a regular e.g. annual basis.
In order to avoid an indefinite usage of the certificate when evolved attack methods would
require a re-assessment of the products resistance to state of the art attack methods, the
maximum validity of the certificate has been limited. The certificate issued on 8 May 2024
is valid until 7 May 2029. Validity can be re-newed by re-certification.
The owner of the certificate is obliged:
5
Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility
8 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
1. when advertising the certificate or the fact of the product's certification, to refer to
the Certification Report as well as to provide the Certification Report, the Security
Target and user guidance documentation mentioned herein to any customer of the
product for the application and usage of the certified product,
2. to inform the Certification Body at BSI immediately about vulnerabilities of the
product that have been identified by the developer or any third party after issuance
of the certificate,
3. to inform the Certification Body at BSI immediately in the case that security relevant
changes in the evaluated life cycle, e.g. related to development and production sites
or processes, occur, or the confidentiality of documentation and information related
to the Target of Evaluation (TOE) or resulting from the evaluation and certification
procedure where the certification of the product has assumed this confidentiality
being maintained, is not given any longer. In particular, prior to the dissemination of
confidential documentation and information related to the TOE or resulting from the
evaluation and certification procedure that do not belong to the deliverables
according to the Certification Report part B, or for those where no dissemination
rules have been agreed on, to third parties, the Certification Body at BSI has to be
informed.
In case of changes to the certified version of the product, the validity can be extended to
the new versions and releases, provided the sponsor applies for assurance continuity (i.e.
re-certification or maintenance) of the modified product, in accordance with the procedural
requirements, and the evaluation does not reveal any security deficiencies.
6. Publication
The product ZEMO VML-GK2, HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0 has been included in the BSI list of
certified products, which is published regularly (see also Internet: https://www.bsi.bund.de
and [5]). Further information can be obtained from BSI-Infoline +49 228 9582-111.
Further copies of this Certification Report can be requested from the developer6
of the
product. The Certification Report may also be obtained in electronic form at the internet
address stated above.
6
ZEMO GmbH
Franz-Mader-Straße 9
94036 Passau
9 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
B. Certification Results
The following results represent a summary of
● the Security Target of the sponsor for the Target of Evaluation,
● the relevant evaluation results from the evaluation facility, and
● complementary notes and stipulations of the certification body.
10 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
1. Executive Summary
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the Mobile Card Terminal “Card Reader ZEMO VML-
GK2” Hardware-Version 2.0.0 / Firmware Version 3.2.0 with integrated smart card readers.
The TOE fulfils the requirements to be used with the German electronic Health Card (eHC)
and the German Professional Card (HPC) based on the regulations of the German
healthcare system.
The Security Target [6] is the basis for this certification. It is based on the certified
Protection Profile Common Criteria Protection Profile Mobile Card Terminal for the German
Healthcare System (MobCT), Version 1.4, BSI-CC-PP-0052-2015, 24 September 2014
[8].
The TOE Security Assurance Requirements (SAR) are based entirely on the assurance
components defined in Part 3 of the Common Criteria (see part C or [1], Part 3 for details).
The TOE meets the assurance requirements of the Evaluation Assurance Level EAL 3
augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_IMP.1, ADV_TDS.3, ALC_TAT.1, AVA_VAN.5.
The TOE Security Functional Requirements (SFR) relevant for the TOE are outlined in the
Security Target [6], chapter 6.1. They are selected from Common Criteria Part 2 and some
of them are newly defined. Thus the TOE is CC Part 2 extended.
The TOE Security Functional Requirements are implemented by the following TOE
Security Functionality:
TOE Security Functionality Addressed issue
SF_1.SPE_MEM On reset to factory defaults the TOE will deallocate all
information in the memory (except the installed firmware) and
erase encrypted health insurance in the persistent storage, as
well as temporary user data.
SF_2.FWDL The TOE can be securely updated with new firmware. The
secure update guarantees that only authentic firmware,
electronically signed by the manufacturer, will be accepted by
the TOE and installed into the TOE.
SF_3.SEC_PIN_ENTRY When a PIN has to be entered, the TOE changes into a
secure PIN-entry mode. This mode can only be activated by
the TOE and is indicated to the user. For every entered PIN
digit, the TOE will display an asterisk symbol. PINs and PIN
digits will never be displayed in clear text and no subject can
read out the administrator PIN.
SF_4.PIN_AUTH The TOE maintains the roles of the administrator, medical
supplier and associates users with roles.
SF_5.TOE_LOCK The TOE terminates an interactive session after 15 minutes of
administrator inactivity, after [1 – 60 minutes] of medical
supplier inactivity and after power loss.
SF_6.SELFTEST The TOE performs self-tests at initial start-up and following
start-ups. Self-tests check the TOE’s functionality by checking
TOE hardware and evaluating the integrity of the stored
firmware and the integrity of TSF data.
SF_7.Storage_Encryption The TOE encrypts health insurance data stored in the
persistent storage of the TOE with the cryptographic algorithm
AES GCM and cryptographic key size of 256 bit.
SF_8.Card_Communication The TOE enables a communication the smart cards that are
11 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
TOE Security Functionality Addressed issue
inserted in the TOE. When an authorised card is put into one
of the TOE's slots, the TOE will read out the card’s X.509
certificate and check it. The Card holder PINs entered via the
PIN pad is only sent to the card slot where the authorised card
is plugged in.
SF_9.DMS_Communication The TOE enables the medical supplier to transfer data records
from the persistent storage to the DMS.
SF_10.Reliable_Time_Stamps The TOE provides reliable time stamps with a clock precision
of at least ±100ppm.
SF_11.Detection_of_Physical_Attack The TOE provides the capability to determine during operation
of the TOE whether physical tampering with the TOE has
occurred.
Table 1: TOE Security Functionalities
For more details please refer to the Security Target [6], chapter 7.1.
The assets to be protected by the TOE are defined in the Security Target [6], chapter 1.4.7.
Based on these assets the TOE Security Problem is defined in terms of Assumptions,
Threats and Organisational Security Policies. This is outlined in the Security Target [6],
chapter 3.1 – 3.3.
This certification covers the configurations of the TOE as outlined in chapter 8.
The vulnerability assessment results as stated within this certificate do not include a rating
for those cryptographic algorithms and their implementation suitable for encryption and
decryption (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2).
The certification results only apply to the version of the product indicated in the certificate
and on the condition that all the stipulations are kept as detailed in this Certification
Report. This certificate is not an endorsement of the IT product by the Federal Office for
Information Security (BSI) or any other organisation that recognises or gives effect to this
certificate, and no warranty of the IT product by BSI or any other organisation that
recognises or gives effect to this certificate, is either expressed or implied.
2. Identification of the TOE
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is called:
ZEMO VML-GK2, HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0
The following table outlines the TOE deliverables:
No Type Identifier Release Form of Delivery
1 HW &
SW
Card Reader ZEMO VMLGK2
SHA-256-Hash:
d4958b5c881199e7952e41810
d004d01119a6310ef35d0576bc
032473aebe512
HW V2.0.0 / FW V3.2.0 TOE delivered by the secure
delivery chain.
Firmware Image initially included
in the TOE.
12 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
No Type Identifier Release Form of Delivery
2 SW Card Reader ZEMO VMLGK2
Firmware
SHA-256-Hash:
d4958b5c881199e7952e41810
d004d01119a6310ef35d0576bc
032473aebe512
FW V3.2.0 Provided by the developer on its
homepage:
https://zemo.de/vmlgk-
downloads/
3 DOC Bedienungsanleitung
ZEMO-VML-GK2 FW 3.2.0
SHA-256-Hash:
43e9a261755b828c55fc90b785
8a8fc246cde9a5ade1de4f9390
d09bb9d7173e
V2.2.0, 2023-11-24 Provided by the developer on its
homepage:
https://zemo.de/vmlgk-
downloads/
4 DOC Kurzanleitung ZEMO VMLGK2
FW 3.2.0
SHA-256-Hash:
44ac3d9bd4af1c91533177b8b5
5029ab307ba9549ac5b9c1948f
fbf195434815
V1.1.0, 2023-11-24 Provided by the developer on its
homepage:
https://zemo.de/vmlgk-
downloads/
5 DOC Beschreibung sicherer
Lieferweg für das Produkt
ZEMO VML-GK2 FW:
V3.2.0
SHA-256-Hash:
ac1abab097a44de5f602f0c409
e564b375d8bee1900d01d2607
36e49166416fc
V3.00 2023-11-24 Provided by the developer on its
homepage:
https://zemo.de/vmlgk-
downloads/
Table 2: Deliverables of the TOE
The TOE is delivered to the end user in such a way as defined by the secure delivery
chain. The related documentation can be found in [9], see 5. in Table 2 above.
The box with the TOE is sealed with security seals and packed into a security bag.
Security seals and security bags are printed with numbers. Furthermore, each TOE
contains a transport code and a verification code.
The applicant will send the recipient an e-mail with the following information to the TOE:
serial number of the TOE, tracing information, IDs of security seals, ID of security bag,
transport code and verification code. The e-mail is signed with an electronic signature and
will be sent till 8 a.m. The TOE will be delivered till 12 a.m.
The recipient has to check the serial number of the TOE and the IDs of the security seals
and security bag. Then the recipient has to follow the authentication protocol by entering
the transport code and checking the verification code that is displayed at the screen. Only
if all IDs and codes are correct and the TOE is delivered in time, it is allowed to use the
TOE.
The hardware version is labelled at the bottom of the TOE. Furthermore, the hardware
andthe firmware version are displayed at the display of the TOE.
13 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
3. Security Policy
The Security Policy is expressed by the set of Security Functional Requirements and
implemented by the TOE. It covers the following issues:
• cryptographic support,
• user data protection,
• identification and authentication,
• security management,
• TOE access,
• protection of the TSF.
Specific details concerning the above mentioned security policies can be found in chapter
6 of the Security Target [6].
4. Assumptions and Clarification of Scope
The Assumptions defined in the Security Target and some aspects of Threats and
Organisational Security Policies are not covered by the TOE itself. These aspects lead to
specific security objectives to be fulfilled by the TOE-Environment. The following topics are
of relevance:
OE.MEDIC: The medical supplier shall be non-hostile, always act with care, and read the
existing guidance documentation of the TOE.
OE.ADMIN: The administrator shall be non-hostile, always act with care, knows the
existing guidance documentation of the TOE and adhere to the rules of the TOEs
environment.
OE.Developer: The developer is assumed to be non-hostile, always act with care and
knows the existing guidance documentation of the TOE.
OE.CARDS: The authorised cards and the eHC are smart cards that comply with the
specification of the gematik.
OE.DMS: The TOE shall only be connected to a Data Management System for a practice
or hospital that is trusted by the medical supplier.
OE.PHYSICAL: The secure TOE environment shall protect the TOE against physical
manipulation.
OE.ENVIRONMENT: While the TOE is in use by either the medical supplier or the
administrator, they shall always keep the TOE under their control. This applies to its
authenticated, as well as its unauthenticated state. While the TOE (including the VML
Security Card) is not in use, it is kept in a secure area.
Details can be found in the Security Target [6], chapter 4.2.
5. Architectural Information
The TOE „ZEMO VML-GK2“ is a mobile smart card terminal.
The firmware is built modular with the following subsystems:
• The subsystem Komm implements the activities at the USB- and RS232-interface.
14 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
• The subsystem Card is relevant for the interaction to the smart cards.
• The subsystem Bediener realizes the user interface.
• The subsystem Control controls the logic of the TOE.
At firmware update the whole firmware is updated.
6. Documentation
The evaluated documentation as outlined in table 2 is being provided with the product to
the customer. This documentation contains the required information for secure usage of
the TOE in accordance with the Security Target.
Additional obligations and notes for secure usage of the TOE as outlined in chapter 10 of
this report have to be followed.
7. IT Product Testing
There is only one evaluated configuration of the TOE, see chapter 8 below.
7.1. Developer's Test according to ATE_FUN
TOE configuration tested:
The tests have been performed in part with the unmodified version of the TOE and
in part with modified TOE versions that target internal behaviour.
TOE test environment configurations:
The test setup comprises a notebook with two virtual.card kits and real smart cards
(eHC, HPC, SMC-B). The virtal.card kits are used to simulate special situations, for
example, a smart card with wrong/invalid certificates.
Developer’s testing approach:
• Test concept is based on covering all TSFIs.
• Positive and negative tests are applied.
• Tests considering the different roles that can access the TOE.
• Tests cover all TSF subsystems in the TOE design.
• Developer provides mappings to the tested TSFI(s) and subsystem(s), which in turn
map to the SFR(s).
• The test descriptions comprise (inter alia):
◦ Preconditions: preparative steps,
◦ test steps: core test steps, and
◦ test results: expected and actual test results.
Verdict for the activity:
The developer’s testing efforts have been proven sufficient to demonstrate that the
TSFIs and subsystems perform as expected.
15 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
7.2. Evaluator Tests
All testing activity of the evaluation body is covered by testing in the scope of ATE_IND
and AVA_VAN.
Independent Testing according to ATE_IND
• TOE test configurations:
The evaluation body used the same test configurations and test environment as the
developer during functional testing.
• TSFI selection criteria:
The evaluation body chose to cover the existing interfaces without any restrictions.
• TSFI tested:
All interfaces were considered during testing.
• Developer tests performed:
The evaluation body chose to inspect all developer tests. They also chose to repeat
a subset of tests covering all TSFIs. The subset includes all test scenarios used by
the developer.
• Independent testing:
The evaluator conducted independent testing consisting of penetration testing,
implementation analysis and guidance testing. The testing effort covers all
functional areas of concern.
Verdict for the sub-activity:
No deviations were found between the expected and the actual test results.
Penetration Testing according to AVA_VAN
• Overview:
The configuration defined in the ST was tested. Furthermore, different TOE variants
were used during penetration testing to verify different mechanisms.
The overall test result is that no deviations were found between the expected and
the actual test results; moreover, no attack scenario with the attack potential High
was actually successful.
• Penetration testing approach:
The evaluation body conducted penetration testing based on Functional Areas of
Concern derived from SFRs and architectural mechanisms. The areas were
prioritized with regards to various factors, e.g. attack surface, estimated flaw
likelihood, developer testing coverage, detectability of flaws during developer
testing.
Medium and high areas were guaranteed to be penetration tested with a stronger
emphasis on high priorities. Low priorities were also considered during penetration
testing but could be less emphasized.
The penetration testing activities were performed as tests and as analytical tasks.
Whenever an analysis was estimated to yield better results, the evaluator chose the
analytical approach.
16 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
• TOE test configurations:
The TOE was delivered by the developer in different configurations: This includes a
final operational and a special AVA variant. The AVA configuration provides
debugging outputs, which allow the evaluator to have a look at internal states of the
system.
• Attack scenarios having been tested:
The evaluation body considered security analysis and penetration testing in the
following areas:
◦ Handling of HPC / eHC smart cards,
◦ update,
◦ authentication,
◦ secure encryption / decryption,
◦ leakage, and
◦ USB connection.
• Tested security functionality:
The evaluator ensured that all areas listed above are tested. The penetration testing
was then conducted based on priorities as described above. Therefore, a complete
coverage of security functional testing based on Functional Areas of Concern is
performed.
Verdict for the sub-activity:
The overall test result is that no deviations were found between the expected and
the actual test results. No attack scenario with the attack potential High was actually
successful in the TOE’s operational environment.
7.3. Summary of Test Results and Effectiveness Analysis
The evaluation body has not determined any derivations between the expected and the
actual test results in the context of ATE_IND and AVA_VAN. The penetration testing
performed has demonstrated that the TOE is resistant to attackers with a High attack
potential.
8. Evaluated Configuration
This certification covers the following configurations of the TOE:
• Hardware-Version 2.0.0
• Firmware-Version 3.2.0
There is only one evaluated configuration of the TOE.
17 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
9. Results of the Evaluation
9.1. CC specific results
The Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) [7] was provided by the ITSEF according to the
Common Criteria [1], the Methodology [2], the requirements of the Scheme [3] and all
interpretations and guidelines of the Scheme (AIS) [4] as relevant for the TOE.
The Evaluation Methodology CEM [2] was used.
As a result of the evaluation the verdict PASS is confirmed for the following assurance
components:
● All components of the EAL 3 package including the class ASE as defined in the CC (see
also part C of this report)
● The components ADV_FSP.4, ADV_IMP.1, ADV_TDS.3, ALC_TAT.1, AVA_VAN.5
augmented for this TOE evaluation.
The evaluation has confirmed:
● PP Conformance:Common Criteria Protection Profile Mobile Card Terminal for the
German Healthcare System (MobCT), Version 1.4, BSI-CC-PP-0052-2015, 24
September 2014 [8]
● for the Functionality: PP conformant
Common Criteria Part 2 extended
● for the Assurance: Common Criteria Part 3 conformant
EAL 3 augmented by ADV_FSP.4, ADV_IMP.1, ADV_TDS.3,
ALC_TAT.1, AVA_VAN.5
The results of the evaluation are only applicable to the TOE as defined in chapter 2 and
the configuration as outlined in chapter 8 above.
9.2. Results of cryptographic assessment
The following table gives an overview of the cryptographic functionalities inside the TOE to
enforce the security policy and outlines the standard of application where its specific
appropriateness is stated.
Purpose Cryptographi
c Mechanism
Standard of
Implementation
Key Size
in Bits
Standard of
Application
Related SFR
Encryption /
decryption of health
insurance data
AES-256 in
GCM mode
[gemSpec_Krypt,
3.5.1 / 3.6]
256 [FIPS197]
[NIST800-
38D].
FCS_COP.
1/AES
Cryptographic
operation for
signature verification
of firmware updates
RSA-3072
and
SHA-512
[gemSpec_Krypt, 3.7]
[RFC6234]
3072 [FIPS180-4] FCS_COP.
1/FW
Table 3: TOE cryptographic functionality
The strength of the these cryptographic algorithms was not rated in the course of this
certification procedure (see BSIG Section 9, Para. 4, Clause 2).
18 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
According to the application standards in the table above, especially the standards issued
by gematik, the algorithms are suitable for for the intended purposes listed. An explicit
validity period is not given.
10. Obligations and Notes for the Usage of the TOE
The documents as outlined in table 2 contain necessary information about the usage of the
TOE and all security hints therein have to be considered. In addition all aspects of
Assumptions, Threats and OSPs as outlined in the Security Target not covered by the TOE
itself need to be fulfilled by the operational environment of the TOE.
The customer or user of the product shall consider the results of the certification within his
system risk management process. In order for the evolution of attack methods and
techniques to be covered, he should define the period of time until a re-assessment of the
TOE is required and thus requested from the sponsor of the certificate.
The limited validity for the usage of cryptographic algorithms as outlined in chapter 9 has
to be considered by the user and his system risk management process, too.
If available, certified updates of the TOE should be used. If non-certified updates or
patches are available the user of the TOE should request the sponsor to provide a re-
certification. In the meantime a risk management process of the system using the TOE
should investigate and decide on the usage of not yet certified updates and patches or
take additional measures in order to maintain system security.
The assumptions defined in ST [6] needs to be fulfilled. Especially OE.MEDIC,
OE.PHYSICAL and OE.ENVIRONMENT are needed regarding the physical security of the
TOE.
11. Security Target
For the purpose of publishing, the Security Target [6] of the Target of Evaluation (TOE) is
provided within a separate document as Annex A of this report.
12. Regulation specific aspects (eIDAS, QES)
None
13. Definitions
13.1. Acronyms
AIS Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme
BSI Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik / Federal Office for
Information Security, Bonn, Germany
BSIG BSI-Gesetz / Act on the Federal Office for Information Security
CCRA Common Criteria Recognition Arrangement
CC Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation
CEM Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation
cPP Collaborative Protection Profile
19 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
EAL Evaluation Assurance Level
eGK Elektronische Gesundheitskarte
eHC electronic Health Card
eHCT electronic Health Card Terminal
ETR Evaluation Technical Report
gematik Gesellschaft für Telematikanwendungen der Gesundheitskarte mbH
HBA Heilberufsausweis
HPC Health Professional Card
IT Information Technology
ITSEF Information Technology Security Evaluation Facility
PP Protection Profile
SAR Security Assurance Requirement
SFP Security Function Policy
SFR Security Functional Requirement
ST Security Target
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSF TOE Security Functionality
13.2. Glossary
Augmentation - The addition of one or more requirement(s) to a package.
Collaborative Protection Profile - A Protection Profile collaboratively developed by an
International Technical Community endorsed by the Management Committee.
Extension - The addition to an ST or PP of functional requirements not contained in CC
part 2 and/or assurance requirements not contained in CC part 3.
Formal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics based on well-
established mathematical concepts.
Informal - Expressed in natural language.
Object - A passive entity in the TOE, that contains or receives information, and upon which
subjects perform operations.
Package - named set of either security functional or security assurance requirements
Protection Profile - A formal document defined in CC, expressing an implementation
independent set of security requirements for a category of IT Products that meet specific
consumer needs.
Security Target - An implementation-dependent statement of security needs for a specific
identified TOE.
Semiformal - Expressed in a restricted syntax language with defined semantics.
Subject - An active entity in the TOE that performs operations on objects.
20 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
Target of Evaluation - An IT Product and its associated administrator and user guidance
documentation that is the subject of an Evaluation.
TOE Security Functionality - Combined functionality of all hardware, software, and
firmware of a TOE that must be relied upon for the correct enforcement of the SFRs.
14. Bibliography
[1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,
Part 1: Introduction and general model, Revision 5, April 2017
Part 2: Security functional components, Revision 5, April 2017
Part 3: Security assurance components, Revision 5, April 2017
https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org
[2] Common Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation (CEM),
Evaluation Methodology, Version 3.1, Rev. 5, April 2017,
https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org
[3] BSI certification: Scheme documentation describing the certification process (CC-
Produkte) and Scheme documentation on requirements for the Evaluation Facility,
approval and licencing (CC-Stellen), https://www.bsi.bund.de/zertifizierung
[4] Application Notes and Interpretations of the Scheme (AIS) as relevant for the TOE7
https://www.bsi.bund.de/AIS
[5] German IT Security Certificates (BSI 7148), periodically updated list published also
on the BSI Website, https://www.bsi.bund.de/zertifizierungsreporte
[6] Security Target BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024, Version 3.02, 2024-01-29, Security
Target for a Common Criteria EAL3+ Evaluation of the Product ZEMO VML-GK2
from ZEMO GmbH
[7] Evaluation Technical Report, Version 3, 2024-03-25, EVALUATION TECHNICAL
REPORT SUMMARY, TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH, (confidential document)
[8] Common Criteria Protection Profile Mobile Card Terminal for the German Healthcare
System (MobCT), Version 1.4, BSI-CC-PP-0052-2015, 24 September 2014
[9] Beschreibung sicherer Lieferweg für das Produkt ZEMO VML-GK2 FW: V3.2.0 der
ZEMO GmbH, Version 3.00, 2023-11-24
[10] Configuration list for the TOE, Stückliste VML-GK2, HW2.0.0, Version 3.2.0; SVN
Liste aller CC relevanten Dokumente, Version 1170, 2024-03-21; SVN Liste aller
entwicklungsrelevanten Dokumente, Version 809, 2024-03-22, (confidential
documents)
[11] Guidance documentation for the TOE, Version 2.2.0, 2023-11-24,
Bedienungsanleitung ZEMO-VML-GK2 (Versichertenkarten-Mobil-Leser), ZEMO
GmbH
7
specifically
• AIS 32, Version 7, CC-Interpretationen im deutschen Zertifizierungsschema
• AIS 38, Version 2, Reuse of evaluation results
21 / 23
Certification Report BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024
C. Excerpts from the Criteria
For the meaning of the assurance components and levels the following references to the
Common Criteria can be followed:
• On conformance claim definitions and descriptions refer to CC part 1 chapter 10.5
• On the concept of assurance classes, families and components refer to CC Part 3
chapter 7.1
• On the concept and definition of pre-defined assurance packages (EAL) refer to CC
Part 3 chapters 7.2 and 8
• On the assurance class ASE for Security Target evaluation refer to CC Part 3
chapter 12
• On the detailed definitions of the assurance components for the TOE evaluation
refer to CC Part 3 chapters 13 to 17
• The table in CC part 3 , Annex E summarizes the relationship between the
evaluation assurance levels (EAL) and the assurance classes, families and
components.
The CC are published at https://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/cc/
22 / 23
BSI-DSZ-CC-0623-V3-2024 Certification Report
D. Annexes
List of annexes of this certification report
Annex A: Security Target provided within a separate document.
Note: End of report
23 / 23