National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client 4.0
for Android
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-10770-2017
Dated: March 1, 2017
Version: 0.2
National Institute of Standards and Technology National Security Agency
Information Technology Laboratory Information Assurance Directorate
100 Bureau Drive 9800 Savage Road STE 6940
Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6940
®
TM
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Validation Team
Herbert Ellis
Kelly Hood
Ken Stutterheim
The Aerospace Corporation
Columbia, MD
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
Tammy Compton
Chris Keenan
Khai Van
Katie Sykes
Gossamer Security Solutions
Catonsville, MD
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
iii
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary........................................................................................1
2 Identification...................................................................................................1
3 Architectural Information ...............................................................................4
3.1 TOE Evaluated Configuration ..................................................................4
3.2 Physical Boundaries..................................................................................4
4 Security Policy................................................................................................4
4.1 Cryptographic support ..............................................................................5
4.2 User data protection ..................................................................................5
4.3 Identification and authentication...............................................................5
4.4 Security management................................................................................5
4.5 Protection of the TSF................................................................................5
4.6 Trusted path/channels ...............................................................................5
5 Assumptions....................................................................................................6
6 Clarification of Scope .....................................................................................6
7 Documentation................................................................................................6
8 IT Product Testing ..........................................................................................6
8.1 Developer Testing.....................................................................................6
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing .....................................................7
9 Evaluated Configuration .................................................................................7
10 Results of the Evaluation ................................................................................7
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE)..................................................7
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV) ....................................................8
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD) .......................................8
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC) ...........................8
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE) .......8
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)...............................................9
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results................................................................9
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations ........................................................9
12 Annexes.........................................................................................................10
13 Security Target..............................................................................................10
14 Glossary ........................................................................................................10
15 Bibliography .................................................................................................11
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
1
1 Executive Summary
This report documents the assessment of the National Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP)
validation team of the evaluation of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
(IVPNCPP14) solution provided by Cisco Systems, Inc. It presents the evaluation results, their
justifications, and the conformance results. This Validation Report is not an endorsement of the
Target of Evaluation by any agency of the U.S. government, and no warranty is either expressed or
implied.
The evaluation was performed by the Gossamer Security Solutions (Gossamer) Common Criteria
Testing Laboratory (CCTL) in Catonsville, MD, United States of America, and was completed in
March 2017. The information in this report is largely derived from the Evaluation Technical Report
(ETR) and associated test reports, all written by Gossamer Security Solutions. The evaluation
determined that the product is both Common Criteria Part 2 Extended and Part 3 Conformant, and
meets the assurance requirements of the Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN)
Clients, Version 1.4, 21 October 2013.
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android.
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) identified in this Validation Report has been evaluated at a NIAP
approved Common Criteria Testing Laboratory using the Common Methodology for IT Security
Evaluation (Version 3.1, Rev 4) for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security
Evaluation (Version 3.1, Rev 4). This Validation Report applies only to the specific version of the
TOE as evaluated. The evaluation has been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the
NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme and the conclusions of the testing
laboratory in the evaluation technical report are consistent with the evidence provided.
The validation team monitored the activities of the evaluation team, provided guidance on technical
issues and evaluation processes, and reviewed the individual work units and successive versions of
the ETR. The validation team found that the evaluation showed that the product satisfies all of the
functional requirements and assurance requirements stated in the Security Target (ST). Therefore,
the validation team concludes that the testing laboratory’s findings are accurate, the conclusions
justified, and the conformance results are correct. The conclusions of the testing laboratory in the
evaluation technical report are consistent with the evidence produced.
The technical information included in this report was obtained from the Cisco AnyConnect Secure
Mobility Client for Android Security Target, Version 1.0, February 23, 2017, and other supporting
documentation created as part of the analysis performed by the evaluation team.
2 Identification
The CCEVS is a joint National Security Agency (NSA) and National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) effort to establish commercial facilities to perform trusted product evaluations.
Under this program, security evaluations are conducted by commercial testing laboratories called
Common Criteria Testing Laboratories (CCTLs) using the Common Evaluation Methodology
(CEM) in accordance with National Voluntary Laboratory Assessment Program (NVLAP)
accreditation.
The NIAP Validation Body assigns Validators to monitor the CCTLs to ensure quality and
consistency across evaluations. Developers of information technology products desiring a security
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
2
evaluation contract with a CCTL and pay a fee for their product’s evaluation. Upon successful
completion of the evaluation, the product is added to NIAP’s Validated Products List.
Table 1 provides information needed to completely identify the product, including:
 The Target of Evaluation (TOE): the fully qualified identifier of the product as evaluated.
 The Security Target (ST), describing the security features, claims, and assurances of the
product.
 The conformance result of the evaluation.
 The Protection Profile to which the product is conformant.
 The organizations and individuals participating in the evaluation.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
3
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers
Item Identifier
Evaluation Scheme United States NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
TOE: Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client v4.0 for Android
Protection Profile Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4,
21 October 2013
ST: Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android Security Target, Version
1.0, February 23, 2017
Evaluation Technical
Report
Evaluation Technical Report for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for
Android, Version 0.2, February 24, 2017
CC Version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,
rev 4
Conformance Result CC Part 2 extended, CC Part 3 conformant
Sponsor Cisco Systems, Inc.
Developer Cisco Systems, Inc.
Common Criteria
Testing Lab (CCTL)
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
CCEVS Validators Herbert Ellis, Kelly Hood, Kenneth Stutterheim
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
4
3 Architectural Information
Note: The following architectural description is based on the description presented in the Security
Target.
The TOE is the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client (herein after referred to as the VPN
client, or the TOE). The Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client provides remote users with
secure IPsec (IKEv2) VPN connections to the Cisco 5500 Series Adaptive Security Appliance
(ASA) VPN Gateway allowing installed applications to communicate as though connected
directly to the enterprise network.
The TOE is a software-only product that provides protection of data in transit across a public
network. The VPN client implements IPsec to establish a cryptographic tunnel protecting the
transmission of data between IPsec peers. The VPN client is intended to be located outside an
organization’s private network, protecting data flows between a host and the Cisco 5500 Series
Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) VPN Gateway.
3.1 TOE Evaluated Configuration
The TOE is a mobile VPN client application executing on an Android mobile device platform. It
requires one of the following Common Criteria certified mobile platforms:
 Samsung Galaxy S7/S7 Edge, S6/S6 Edge, Galaxy Note 5, and Galaxy Tab S2
Refer to the Samsung Galaxy Devices with Android 6 Security Target1
and the Samsung Galaxy
S7 Devices on Android 6 Security Target2
for information regarding the evaluated configuration
requirements.
3.2 Physical Boundaries
The TOE is a software-only VPN client application. The underlying mobile platform on which
the TOE resides is considered part of the IT environment.
The underlying platform provides some of the security functionality required in the VPNv1.4
Client PP, which is denoted with the phrase “TOE Platform” in the Security Target.
4 Security Policy
This section summarizes the security functionality of the TOE:
- Cryptographic support
- User data protection
- Identification and authentication
1
http://www.niap-ccevs.org/Product/Compliant.cfm?pid=10726
2
https://www.niap-ccevs.org/Product/Compliant.cfm?pid=10739
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
5
- Security management
- Protection of the TSF
- Trusted path/channels
4.1 Cryptographic support
The TOE provides cryptography in support of IPsec with ESP symmetric cryptography for bulk
AES encryption/decryption and SHA-2 algorithm for hashing. In addition, the TOE provides the
cryptography to support Diffie-Hellman key exchange and derivation function used in the IKEv2
and ESP protocols. The cryptographic algorithm implementation has been validated for CAVP
conformance.
The TOE platform provides asymmetric cryptography, which is used by the TOE for IKE peer
authentication using digital signature and hashing services. The TOE platform also provides a
DRBG.
4.2 User data protection
The TOE platform ensures that residual information from previously sent network packets
processed through the platform are protected from being passed into subsequent network packets.
4.3 Identification and authentication
The TOE and TOE platform perform device-level X.509 certificate-based authentication of the
VPN Gateway during IKE v2 key exchange. Device-level authentication allows the TOE to
establish a secure channel with a trusted VPN Gateway. The secure channel is established only
after each endpoint successfully authenticates with the other.
4.4 Security management
The TOE, TOE platform, and VPN Gateway provide the management functions to configure the
security functionality provided by the TOE.
4.5 Protection of the TSF
The TOE performs a suite of self-tests during initial start-up to verify correct operation of its
FIPS 140-2 validated algorithms. Upon execution, the integrity of the TOEs software executables
is also verified. The TOE Platform provides for the verification of TOE software updates prior to
installation.
4.6 Trusted path/channels
The TOE’s implementation of IPsec provides a trusted channel ensuring sensitive data is
protected from unauthorized disclosure or modification when transmitted from the host to the
Cisco 5500 Series Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) VPN gateway.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
6
5 Assumptions
The Security Problem Definition, including the assumptions, may be found in the Protection Profile
for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4, 21 October 2013 (IVPNCPP14).
That information has not been reproduced here and the IVPNCPP14 should be consulted if there is
interest in that material.
6 Clarification of Scope
All evaluations (and all products) have limitations, as well as potential misconceptions that need
clarifying. This text covers some of the more important limitations and clarifications of this
evaluation. Note that:
1. As with any evaluation, this evaluation only shows that the evaluated configuration meets
the security claims made, with a certain level of assurance (the assurance activities
specified in the Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients and as
performed by the evaluation team).
2. This evaluation covers only the specific product version identified in this document, and
not any earlier or later versions released or in process.
3. This evaluation did not specifically search for, nor attempt to exploit, vulnerabilities that
were not “obvious” or vulnerabilities to objectives not claimed in the ST. The CEM
defines an “obvious” vulnerability as one that is easily exploited with a minimum of
understanding of the TOE, technical sophistication and resources.
4. The functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional requirements
specified in the IVPNCPP14 and applicable Technical Decisions. Any additional security
related functional capabilities of the TOE were not covered by this evaluation.
7 Documentation
The following documentation was used as evidence for the evaluation of the Cisco AnyConnect
Secure Mobility Client for Android:
 Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client v4.0 for Android CC Configuration Guide,
Version 1.0, September 2016
Any additional customer documentation delivered with the product or available through download
was not included in the scope of the evaluation and hence should not be relied upon when using the
products as evaluated.
8 IT Product Testing
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the Evaluation Team. It is derived
from information contained in the Detailed Test Report (IVPNCPP14) for AnyConnect Secure
Mobility Client for Android, Version 0.2, 02/24/17, which is not publicly available. The Assurance
Activity Report (IVPNCPP14) for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android, Version
0.4, 02/21/17 (AAR), provides a non-proprietary overview of testing and the prescribed assurance
activities.
8.1 Developer Testing
No evidence of developer testing is required in the assurance activities for this product.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
7
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing
The evaluation team verified the product according to the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility
Client v4.0 for Android CC Configuration Guide, Version 1.0, September 2016 document and ran
the tests specified in the IVPNCPP14.
8.3 Test Environment Configuration
9 Evaluated Configuration
The evaluated configuration consists of the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for
Android configured as specified in Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client v4.0 for Android
CC Configuration Guide, Version 1.0, September 2016.
10 Results of the Evaluation
The results of the assurance requirements are generally described in this section and are presented
in detail in the proprietary ETR. The reader of this document can assume that all assurance activities
and work units received a passing verdict.
A verdict for an assurance component is determined by the resulting verdicts assigned to the
corresponding evaluator action elements. The evaluation was conducted based upon CC version
3.1 rev 4 and CEM version 3.1 rev 4. The evaluation determined the Cisco AnyConnect Secure
Mobility Client for Android TOE to be Part 2 extended, and to meet the SARs contained in the
IVPNCPP14.
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE)
The evaluation team applied each ASE CEM work unit. The ST evaluation ensured the ST contains
a description of the environment in terms of policies and assumptions, a statement of security
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
8
requirements claimed to be met by the Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
product that are consistent with the Common Criteria, and product security function descriptions
that support the requirements.
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)
The evaluation team applied each ADV CEM work unit. The evaluation team assessed the design
documentation and found it adequate to aid in understanding how the TSF provides the security
functions. The design documentation consists of a functional specification contained in the Security
target and Guidance documents. Additionally, the evaluator performed the assurance activities
specified in the IVPNCPP14 related to the examination of the information contained in the TSS.
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD)
The evaluation team applied each AGD CEM work unit. The evaluation team ensured the adequacy
of the user guidance in describing how to use the operational TOE. Additionally, the evaluation
team ensured the adequacy of the administrator guidance in describing how to securely administer
the TOE. All of the guides were assessed during the design and testing phases of the evaluation to
ensure they were complete.
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC)
The evaluation team applied each ALC CEM work unit. The evaluation team found that the TOE
was identified.
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE)
The evaluation team applied each ATE CEM work unit. The evaluation team ran the set of tests
specified by the assurance activities in the IVPNCPP14 and recorded the results in a Test Report,
summarized in the AAR.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
9
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)
The evaluation team applied each AVA CEM work unit. The vulnerability analysis is in the
evaluation specific proprietary Detailed Test Report (DTR) prepared by the evaluation team. The
vulnerability analysis includes the results of a public search for vulnerabilities. The public search
for vulnerabilities did not uncover any residual vulnerability.
The evaluators searched the National Vulnerability Database (NVD)
(https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search) and Vulnerability Notes Database (VND)
(http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/) with the following search terms: "Cisco Anyconnect",
"Anyconnect ", "Anyconnect 4.0", "ikev2" and "esp" .
The validators reviewed the work of the evaluation team, and found that sufficient evidence and
justification was provided by the evaluation team to confirm that the evaluation was conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the CEM, and that the conclusion reached by the evaluation
team was justified.
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results
The evaluation team’s assessment of the evaluation evidence demonstrates that the claims in the
ST are met. Additionally, the evaluation team’s testing also demonstrated the accuracy of the
claims in the ST.
The validation team’s assessment of the evidence provided by the evaluation team is that it
demonstrates that the evaluation team followed the procedures defined in the CEM, and correctly
verified that the product meets the claims in the ST.
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations
The validators suggest that the consumer pay particular attention to the evaluated configuration of
the TOE. The functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional requirements
specified in the Security Target, and only the functionality implemented by the SFR’s within the
Security Target was evaluated. All other functionality provided by the TOE, that was not part of
the evaluated configuration, needs to be assessed separately and no further conclusions can be
drawn about its effectiveness.
The TOE is the Cisco VPN client software version 4.0, as installed on Common Criteria Evaluated
platforms, and no earlier or later versions of platforms or software should be considered as
evaluated.
The operating environment includes Cisco ASDM 7.6 software. This software is not part of the
evaluated package, was not evaluated and therefore no claims can be made regarding its
effectiveness nor correct operation.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
10
The Cisco AnyConnect VPN Client software requires the use of a Cisco ASA 5500-X series as the
head-end gateway. Although required in the operational environment in order for the VPN to be
configured and established, the ASA gateway is not part of the evaluated package, and no claims
can be made as to its effectiveness, nor its correct operation. Consumers should be aware that the
appropriate licenses must be obtained and installed on the ASA to permit use of AnyConnect
remote access IPsec VPN.
Astute readers may have noticed references to split-tunneling in both the ST and the Assurance
Activity reports. Please note that split-tunneling is not permitted per the mobile device platform
protection profiles that the TOE is claiming conformance with, therefore the use of split-tunneling
will take the platform, and thereby the TOE, out of the evaluated configuration.
The CC Configuration Guide provides instructions on setting the client into FIPS mode. FIPS mode
is required for operation in the evaluated configuration, Note that non-FIPS mode operation places
the TOE outside of the evaluated configuration.
12 Annexes
Not applicable.
13 Security Target
The ST for this product’s evaluation is Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
Security Target, Version 1.0, February 23, 2017.
14 Glossary
The following definitions are used throughout this document:
 Common Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL). An IT security evaluation facility accredited
by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) and approved by the
CCEVS Validation Body to conduct Common Criteria-based evaluations.
 Conformance. The ability to demonstrate in an unambiguous way that a given implementation
is correct with respect to the formal model.
 Evaluation. The assessment of an IT product against the Common Criteria using the Common
Criteria Evaluation Methodology to determine whether or not the claims made are justified; or
the assessment of a protection profile against the Common Criteria using the Common
Evaluation Methodology to determine if the Profile is complete, consistent, technically sound
and hence suitable for use as a statement of requirements for one or more TOEs that may be
evaluated.
 Evaluation Evidence. Any tangible resource (information) required from the sponsor or
developer by the evaluator to perform one or more evaluation activities.
 Feature. Part of a product that is either included with the product or can be ordered separately.
 Target of Evaluation (TOE). A group of IT products configured as an IT system, or an IT
product, and associated documentation that is the subject of a security evaluation under the CC.
VALIDATION REPORT
Cisco Systems, Inc. AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android
11
 Validation. The process carried out by the CCEVS Validation Body leading to the issue of a
Common Criteria certificate.
 Validation Body. A governmental organization responsible for carrying out validation and for
overseeing the day-to-day operation of the NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation
Scheme.
15 Bibliography
The Validation Team used the following documents to produce this Validation Report:
[1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation: Part 1: Introduction
and General Model, Version 3.1, Revision 4, September 2012.
[2] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1, Revision 4, September 2012.
[3] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 4, September 2102.
[4] Protection Profile for IPsec Virtual Private Network (VPN) Clients, Version 1.4, 21
October 2013
[5] Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android Security Target, Version 1.0,
February 23, 2017 (ST)
[6] Assurance Activity Report (IVPNCPP14) for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
for Android, Version 0.4, 02/21/17 (AAR)
[7] Detailed Test Report (IVPNCPP14) for AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Android,
Version 0.2, 02/24/17 (DTR) [Evaluation Sensitive]
[8] Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, v4.0 for Android CC Configuration Guide,
Version 1.0, September 2016