National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-VID11451-2024
Dated: July 15, 2024
Version: 1.0
National Institute of Standards and Technology Department of Defense
Information Technology Laboratory ATTN: NIAP, Suite 6982
100 Bureau Drive 9800 Savage Road
Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Fort Meade, MD 20755-6982
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Validation Team
Lisa Mitchell
Linda Morrison
Lori Sarem
The MITRE Corporation
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
Julia Miller
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
Columbia, MD
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
iii
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary.................................................................................................1
2 Identification ...........................................................................................................2
3 Architectural Information ........................................................................................2
3.1 TOE Description..............................................................................................3
3.2 TOE Evaluated Platforms.................................................................................3
3.3 TOE Architecture.............................................................................................3
3.4 Physical Boundaries.........................................................................................5
4 Security Policy ........................................................................................................5
4.1 Cryptographic support......................................................................................5
4.2 User data protection.........................................................................................5
4.3 Security management.......................................................................................5
4.4 Privacy.............................................................................................................6
4.5 Protection of the TSF.......................................................................................6
4.6 Trusted path/channels ......................................................................................6
5 Assumptions & Clarification of Scope.....................................................................6
6 Documentation ........................................................................................................7
7 IT Product Testing...................................................................................................7
7.1 Developer Testing............................................................................................8
7.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing .............................................................8
8 Evaluated Configuration..........................................................................................8
9 Results of the Evaluation .........................................................................................8
9.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE) ..........................................................9
9.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV) ............................................................9
9.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD)................................................9
9.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC) ..................................10
9.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE) ...............10
9.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN) .....................................................10
9.7 Summary of Evaluation Results .....................................................................10
10 Validator Comments/Recommendations ................................................................11
11 Annexes.................................................................................................................11
12 Security Target ......................................................................................................11
13 Glossary ................................................................................................................11
14 Bibliography..........................................................................................................12
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
1
1 Executive Summary
This Validation Report (VR) is intended to assist the end user of this product and any security
certification Agent for that end user in determining the suitability of this Information
Technology (IT) product for their environment. End users should review the Security Target
(ST), which is where specific security claims are made, in conjunction with this VR, which
describes how those security claims were tested and evaluated and any restrictions on the
evaluated configuration. Prospective users should carefully read the Assumptions and
Clarification of Scope in Section 5 and the Validator Comments in Section 10, where any
restrictions on the evaluated configuration are highlighted.
This report documents the assessment of the National Information Assurance Partnership
(NIAP) validation team of the evaluation of the Axway Desktop Validator solution provided
by Axway, 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. This VR
applies only to the specific version and configuration of the product as evaluated and
documented in the ST.
The evaluation was performed by the Gossamer Security Solutions (Gossamer) Common
Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL) in Columbia, MD, United States of America, and was
completed in July 2024. 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 Extended, and meets the assurance requirements of the Protection
Profile for Application Software, Version 1.4, 7 October 2021 (ASPP14).
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2.
The TOE identified in this VR has been evaluated at a NIAP approved Common Criteria
Testing Laboratory using the Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (Version
3.1, Rev 5) for conformance to the Common Criteria for IT Security Evaluation (Version
3.1, Rev 5). This VR 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 Axway Desktop
Validator, version 5.2 Security Target, version 0.5, July 2, 2024 and analysis performed by
the validation team.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
2
2 Identification
The CCEVS is a joint National Security Agency (NSA) and National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST) effort to establish commercial facilities to perform trusted product
evaluations. Under this program, security evaluations are conducted by commercial testing
laboratories called Common Criteria Testing Laboratories (CCTLs) using the Common
Evaluation Methodology (CEM) in accordance with National Voluntary Laboratory
Assessment Program (NVLAP) accreditation.
The NIAP Validation Body assigns Validators to monitor the CCTLs to ensure quality and
consistency across evaluations. Developers of information technology products desiring a
security evaluation contract with a CCTL and pay a fee for their product’s evaluation. Upon
successful completion of the evaluation, the product is added to NIAP’s Validated Products
List.
Table 1 provides information needed to completely identify the product, including:
• 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.
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers
Item Identifier
Evaluation Scheme United States NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
TOE Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2
(Specific models identified in Section 8)
Protection Profile Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.4, 7 October 2021
(ASPP14)
ST Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Security Target, version 0.5, July 2, 2024
CC Version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation, Version 3.1,
rev 5
Conformance Result CC Part 2 extended, CC Part 3 extended
Sponsor & Developer Axway, Inc.
Common Criteria
Testing Lab (CCTL)
Gossamer Security Solutions, Inc.
Columbia, MD
CCEVS Validators Lisa Mitchell, Linda Morrison, Lori Sarem
3 Architectural Information
Note: The following architectural description is based on the description presented in the ST.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
3
The Target of Evaluation (TOE) is the Validation Authority Desktop Validator, version 5.2.
3.1 TOE Description
The Axway Desktop Validator (DV) is part of Axway’s Validation Authority Suite, which
provides a comprehensive, scalable, and reliable framework for real-time validation of digital
certifications for the Public Key Infrastructure (PKI). The Axway VA Suite provides a
variety of PKI and certificate management functionality to prevent revoked credentials from
being used for secure email, smart card login, network access (including wireless), or other
sensitive electronic transactions. The Axway DV provides the following functionality:
• Maintains and processes a store of digital certificate revocation data by obtaining the
digital Certificate Revocation List (CRL) from multiple CA or VA sources and
performing end-to-end certificate validation if one or more intermediate CAs are used
and the validation policy requires a complete certificate chain validation.
• Maintains a cache loaded with OCSP responses that are pre-computed or dynamically
built up by proxy client requests to a responder.
• Allows caching of CRLs and delta CRLs to support non-OCSP clients or clients that
want to maintain their own revocation data caches for backup and in low-bandwidth
and non real-time environments.
3.2 TOE Evaluated Platforms
The Axway Desktop Validator allows installation on Microsoft Windows on one of the
following platforms:
• Microsoft Windows 10/11 (64 bit) on a 64 bit Intel Xeon processor
• Microsoft Windows Server 2022 (64 bit) on a 64 bit Intel Xeon processor
The Windows platform is part of the operating environment of the TOE. The TOE can
execute on any Intel Xeon processor, however the lab tested the TOE on an Intel Xeon E5-
2670. The lab also tested the TOE on Windows 11 (64 bit) and Windows Server 2022 (64
bit) in the evaluated configuration.
3.3 TOE Architecture
The Axway VA Suite is composed of the following applications:
1. Validation Authority Server (VA Server) – the VA Server is comprised of the VA
validation server acting as either a Repeater or Responder operating on a Windows or
Linux platform, and the Web based administration (Admin UI). The VA Server
maintains a store of digital certificate revocation data and ensures the integrity and
validity of online transactions by delivering real-time validation of digital certificates.
2. Desktop Validator (DV) - (Standard and Enterprise Editions) - the Desktop Validator is
a Microsoft CAPI compliant revocation trust provider that communicates with the
Validation Authority Server (VA server) in responder mode to check status of digital
certs in real time. DV runs as a service on a 64bit Microsoft Windows platforms and
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
4
can be invoked to validate standard X.509v3 digital certificates issued by any
Certificate Authority (CA). The DV Standard edition provides certificate validation
support for client applications, while the DV Enterprise edition provides certificate
validation support for both client and server applications.
As the focus of this evaluation is on the DV, the lab tested the DV Enterprise edition as the
Enterprise edition is a superset that includes the Standard edition’s functionality. The
diagram below shows the TOE’s interaction with components in its environment.
Figure - Axway Desktop Validator (DV) Diagram
Figure - Axway Desktop Validator (DV) interaction with additional components
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
5
The cryptographic capabilities of Axway DV are provided by the Axway OpenSSL version
3.0.13 (with 3.0.8 FIPS), which is a software cryptographic module that is implemented as
two dynamic link libraries (DLLs) on Windows. It is a user space shared library built upon
a custom version of OpenSSL 3.0.
3.4 Physical Boundaries
The TOE is a software-only application which executes on a Microsoft Windows operating
system platform. The underlying platform is considered part of the operating environment
but provides some of the security functionality required by the ASPP14.
Axway Desktop Validator (Standard & Enterprise Editions)1
v5.2 – a software client
application running on Windows 10, Windows 11, or Microsoft Windows Server 2022 (64
bit) on a 64 bit Intel Xeon processor.
The TOE also requires a Certificate Authority (CA) Revocation Server in the operational
environment to provide the revocation status of valid digital certificates.
4 Security Policy
This section summaries the security functionality of the TOE:
1. Cryptographic support
2. User data protection
3. Security management
4. Privacy
5. Protection of the TSF
6. Trusted path/channels
4.1 Cryptographic support
The TOE does not generate any asymmetric keys.
4.2 User data protection
The TOE does not access any hardware resources (other than network connectivity) or
sensitive information repositories. The TOE does not store any sensitive data in non-volatile
memory. Inbound and outbound network communications are restricted to those that are
application initiated.
4.3 Security management
The TOE provides the ability to configure enhanced revocation checking. The TOE also
provides the ability to check for TOE updates.
1
The Enterprise Edition of the Desktop Validator was tested in the evaluated configuration.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
6
4.4 Privacy
The TOE does not transmit personally identifiable information (PII) over any network
interface.
4.5 Protection of the TSF
The TOE protects itself against exploitation by implementing address space layout
randomization (ASLR) and by not allocating any memory region for both write and execute
permission. The TOE is compiled for Windows with stack-based buffer overflow protection
and does not allow user-modifiable files to be written to directories that contain executable
files. The TOE uses standard platform APIs and includes a number of third-party libraries
used to perform its functions.
The TOE includes mechanisms to check for updates and to query the current version of the
application software. TOE software is digitally signed and distributed using the platform-
supported package manager (Windows). The TOE does not update its own binary code in
any way and when removed, all traces of the TOE application software are deleted.
4.6 Trusted path/channels
The TOE does not transmit any sensitive data across the network.
5 Assumptions & Clarification of Scope
Assumptions
The ST references the PP to which it claims conformance for assumptions about the use of
the TOE. Those assumptions, drawn from the claimed PP, are as follows:
• The TOE relies upon a trustworthy computing platform with a reliable time clock for
its execution. This includes the underlying platform and whatever runtime
environment it provides to the TOE.
• The user of the application software is not willfully negligent or hostile, and uses the
software in compliance with the applied enterprise security policy.
• The administrator of the application software is not careless, willfully negligent or
hostile, and administers the software in compliance with the applied enterprise
security policy.
Clarification of scope
The scope of this evaluation was limited to the functionality and assurances covered in the
ASPP14 as described for this TOE in the ST. Other functionality included in the product was
not assessed as part of this evaluation. All other functionality provided by the devices needs
to be assessed separately, and no further conclusions can be drawn about their effectiveness.
All evaluations (and all products) have limitations, as well as potential misconceptions that
need clarification. This text covers some of the more important limitations and clarifications
of this evaluation. Note that:
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
7
• 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 Application Software and performed
by the evaluation team).
• This evaluation covers only the specific device models and software as identified in
this document, and not any earlier or later versions released or in process.
• Apart from the Admin Guide, additional customer documentation for the specific
Software Application models was not included in the scope of the evaluation and
therefore should not be relied upon when configuring or operating the device as
evaluated.
• This evaluation did not specifically search for, nor attempt to exploit, vulnerabilities
that were not “obvious” or vulnerabilities to objectives not claimed in the ST. The
CEM defines an “obvious” vulnerability as one that is easily exploited with a
minimum of understanding of the TOE, technical sophistication and resources.
• The functionality evaluated is scoped exclusively to the security functional
requirements specified in the ASPP14 and applicable Technical Decisions. Any
additional security related functional capabilities of the TOE were not covered by this
evaluation.
6 Documentation
The vendor offers guidance documents describing the installation process for the TOE as
well as guidance for subsequent administration and use of the applicable security features.
The guidance documentation examined during the evaluation and delivered with the TOE
is as follows:
• Validation Authority Common Criteria Guide, Version 5.2, July 1, 2024
To use the product in the evaluated configuration, the product must be configured as
specified in the Guidance Documentation listed above. Consumers are encouraged to
download the configuration guides from the NIAP website to ensure the device is
configured as evaluated.
Any additional customer documentation provided with the product, or that is available
online was not included in the scope of the evaluation and therefore should not be relied
upon when configuring or operating the device as evaluated.
7 IT Product Testing
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the Evaluation Team. It is
derived from information contained in the proprietary Detailed Test Report for Axway
Desktop Validator, version 5.2, Version 0.2, July 2, 2024 (DTR), as summarized in the
Assurance Activity Report for Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2, Version 0.2, July 2,
2024 (AAR).
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
8
7.1 Developer Testing
No evidence of developer testing is required in the assurance activities for this product.
7.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing
The evaluation team verified the product according to a Common Criteria Certification
document and ran the tests specified in the ASPP14 including the tests associated with
optional and selection-based requirements. The evaluation team executed the tests specified
in the test plan and documented the results in the test report listed above.
Testing took place from October 2023 through July 2024 within the Gossamer Security
Solutions laboratory in Columbia, MD following the procedures identified in the Gossamer
Quality Manual with no deviations. The Independent Testing activity is documented in the
AAR, which is publicly available, and is not duplicated here.
8 Evaluated Configuration
The TOE runs on the evaluated platforms identified in Section 3.2.
The environmental components described in the following table are required to operate the
TOE in the evaluated configuration.
Component Description
Axway VA server
(Mandatory)
The Axway Validation Authority server is another application in the
Axway Validation Authority Suite. The TOE interfaces with the VA
Server to use the VA server’s certificates for outgoing revocation
queries.
Management
Workstation
(Mandatory)
A workstation used by an administrator to locally manage the TOE.
The workstation must have an operating system that is one of the
claimed versions. The TOE is also installed on the workstation.
Certificate
Authority
Revocation
Server
(Mandatory)
The Axway DV requires a Certificate Authority (CA) Revocation
Server to obtain certificate revocation data. The Axway DV obtains a
digital Certificate Revocation List (CRL) from the CA revocation
server.
9 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.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
9
A verdict for an assurance component is determined by the resulting verdicts assigned to the
corresponding evaluator action elements. The evaluation was conducted based upon CC
version 3.1 rev 5 and CEM version 3.1 rev 5. The evaluation determined the Axway Desktop
Validator TOE to be Part 2 extended, and to meet the SARs contained in the ASPP14.
9.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ASE)
The evaluation team applied each ASE CEM work unit. The ST evaluation ensured the ST
contains a description of the environment in terms of policies and assumptions, a statement
of security requirements claimed to be met by the Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2
products that are consistent with the Common Criteria, and product security function
descriptions that support the requirements.
The validation team 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.
9.2 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 ASPP14 related to the examination of the
information contained in the TSS.
The validation team 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.
9.3 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 validation team 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.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
10
9.4 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 validation team 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.
9.5 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 ASPP14 and recorded the results in a Test
Report, summarized in the AAR.
The validation team 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.
9.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (VAN)
The evaluation team applied each AVA CEM work unit. The vulnerability analysis is in the
Detailed Test Report (DTR) prepared by the evaluator. The vulnerability analysis includes
a public search for vulnerabilities. The public search for vulnerabilities did not uncover any
residual vulnerability.
The evaluator searched the National Vulnerability Database
(https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search) and Vulnerability Notes Database
(http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/) with the following search terms: “Axway”, “Axway Desktop
Validator”, “Axway Security Kernel”, “curl”, “openldap”, and “openssl”.
The validation team 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.
9.7 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.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
11
10 Validator Comments/Recommendations
The validation team suggests that the consumer pay particular attention to the evaluated
configuration of the TOE. As stated in the Clarification of Scope, the evaluated functionality
is scoped exclusively to the SFRs specified in the ST, and the only evaluated functionality
was that which was described by the SFRs claimed in the ST. All other functionality provided
by the TOE needs to be assessed separately and no further conclusions can be drawn about
its effectiveness.
Consumers employing the TOE must follow the configuration instructions provided in the
Configuration Guidance documentation listed in Section 6 to ensure the evaluated
configuration is established and maintained.
11 Annexes
Not applicable
12 Security Target
The Security Target is identified as: Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Security Target,
Version 0.5, July 2, 2024.
13 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.
Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Validation Report Version 1.0, July 15, 2024
12
• Target of Evaluation (TOE). A group of IT products configured as an IT system, or an
IT product, and associated documentation that is the subject of a security evaluation
under the CC.
• Validation. The process carried out by the CCEVS Validation Body leading to the issue
of a Common Criteria certificate.
• Validation Body. A governmental organization responsible for carrying out validation
and for overseeing the day-to-day operation of the NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation
and Validation Scheme.
14 Bibliography
The Validation Team used the following documents to produce this Validation Report:
[1] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation: Part 1:
Introduction and General Model, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[2] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 2: Security
functional components, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[3] Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Part 3: Security
assurance components, Version 3.1 Revision 5, April 2017.
[4] Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.4, 7 October 2021 (ASPP14).
[5] Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2 Security Target, Version 0.5, July 2, 2024
(ST).
[6] Assurance Activity Report for Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2, Version 0.2,
July 2, 2024 (AAR).
[7] Detailed Test Report for Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2, Version 0.2, July 2,
2024 (DTR).
[8] Evaluation Technical Report for Axway Desktop Validator, version 5.2, Version
0.2, July 2, 2024 (ETR).
[9] Validation Authority Common Criteria Guide, Version 5.2, July 1, 2024 (AGD).