Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-VID 10371
Dated: December 20, 2012
Version: 1.0
National Institute of Standards and Technology Department of Defense
Information Technology Laboratory National Security Agency
100 Bureau Drive 9800 Savage Road STE 6940
Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6940
®
TM
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Validation Team
Paul Bicknell
Franklin Haskell
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
Computer Sciences Corporation
7231 Parkway Drive
Hanover, Maryland 21076
Evaluators
John Daniels
Cheryl Dugan
Annette Nadeau
Lachlan Turner
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is intended to assist the end-user of this product and any security certification
Agent for the end-user with determining the suitability of this Information Technology
(IT) product in their environment. End-users should review both the Security Target
(ST), which is where specific security claims are made, in conjunction with this
Validation Report (VR), which describes how those security claims were evaluated.
This report documents the assessment by the National Information Assurance Partnership
(NIAP) validation team of the evaluation of the Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203, the
target of evaluation (TOE), performed by Computer Sciences Corporation. It presents the
evaluation results, their justifications, and the conformance results. This report is not an
endorsement of the TOE by any agency of the U.S. government, and no warranty is either
expressed or implied.
The evaluation was performed by Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) of Hanover,
MD, in accordance with the United States evaluation scheme and completed on the 5th
of
November, 2012. The information in this report is largely derived from the ST, the
Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) and the functional testing report. The ST was written
by Computer Sciences Corporation on behalf of Xerox. The evaluation was performed to
conform to the requirements of the Common Criteria for Information Technology
Security Evaluation, Version 3.1, Revision 2, dated September 2007 at Evaluation
Assurance Level 2 (EAL 2) augmented with ALC_FLR.3, and the Common Evaluation
Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM), Version 3.1, Revision 2, dated
September 2007.
The Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 is a multi-function device (MFD) that copies,
prints, scans and faxes. The MFD contains an internal hard disk drive. Standard security
functions include SSL, IPSec, SNMPv3, a host-based firewall, and an internal audit log.
Users may be authenticated to the network or locally at the device. The evaluated
configuration includes the Image Overwrite Security package, a consumer option. The
Image Overwrite Security package causes any temporary image files to be erased from
the internal hard disk drive when those files are no longer needed or on demand at the
discretion of the system administrator.
1.1. Interpretations
There are no applicable Common Criteria interpretations.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
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, commercial testing laboratories called
Common Criteria Testing Laboratories (CCTLs) using the Common Evaluation
Methodology (CEM) for Evaluation Assurance Level (EAL) 1 through EAL 4 in
accordance with National Voluntary Laboratory Assessment Program (NVLAP)
accreditation conduct security evaluations.
The NIAP Validation Body assigns Validators to monitor the CCTLs to ensure quality
and consistency across evaluations. Developers of IT 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;
 Any Protection Profile to which the product is conformant;
 The organizations participating in the evaluation.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers
Item Identifier
Evaluation Scheme United States NIAP Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Target of Evaluation Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203
Protection Profile
U.S. Government Protection Profile for Hardcopy Devices Version (IEEE
Std. 2600.2-2009 Protection Profile, v1.0, 26 February 2010
Security Target
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Security Target, Version 1.0, Revision
1.11, 19th
December 2012
Dates of evaluation June 2009 to November 2012
Evaluation Technical Report
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Evaluation Technical Report,
Computer Sciences Corporation, v1.0, 5 November 2012
Conformance Result EAL 2 augmented with ALC_FLR.3
Common Criteria version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation Version
3.1, Revision 2, September 2007
Common Evaluation
Methodology (CEM) version
CEM version 3.1R2, September 2007
Sponsor Xerox Corporation
Developer Xerox Corporation
Evaluators John Daniels, Cheryl Dugan, Annette Nadeau, Lachlan Turner
Validation Team Paul Bicknell, Franklin Haskell
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
3. SECURITY POLICY
The TOE enforces the following security policies:
 Information Flow Security. The TOE prevents unauthorized data flow between
the fax line interface and the network interface.
 User Data Protection – SSL. The TOE implements the Secure Sockets Layer
(SSL) protocol to protect communication via the Web Graphical User Interface
(GUI) and to protect workflow scanning communications to an SSL enabled
repository.
 User Data Protection – IPSec. The TOE implements Internet Protocol Security
(IPSec) to protect print client communications.
 IP Filtering. The TOE provides the ability for the system administrator to
configure IPv4 filtering rules.
 Network Management Security. The TOE implements Simple Network
Management Protocol v3 (SNMP) for management communications via the SNMP
interface.
 Privileged User Access Control. The TOE restricts management of security
functions to the authorized system administrator.
 User Access Control. The TOE enables system administrators to restrict access to
the print, copy, scan, and fax functions to authorized users.
A complete list of the security functions of the TOE is provided at section 5.1.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
4. SECURITY PROBLEM DEFINITION
4.1. Assumptions
The ST identified the following security assumptions:
 The TOE is located in a restricted or monitored environment that provides
protection from unmanaged access to the physical components and data interfaces
of the TOE.
 TOE Users are aware of the security policies and procedures of their organization,
and are trained and competent to follow those policies and procedures.
 Administrators are aware of the security policies and procedures of their
organization, are trained and competent to follow the manufacturer’s guidance
and documentation, and correctly configure and operate the TOE in accordance
with those policies and procedures.
 Administrators do not use their privileged access rights for malicious purposes.
4.2. Threats
The ST identified the following threats addressed by the TOE:
 User Document Data may be disclosed to unauthorized persons
 User Document Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
 User Function Data may be altered by unauthorized persons
4.3. Organizational Security Policies
The ST identified the following OSPs addressed by the TOE:
 To preserve operational accountability and security, Users will be authorized to
use the TOE only as permitted by the TOE Owner
 To detect corruption of the executable code in the TSF, procedures will exist to
self-verify executable code in the TSF
 To preserve operational accountability and security, records that provide an audit
trail of TOE use and security-relevant events will be created, maintained, and
protected from unauthorized disclosure or alteration, and will be reviewed by
authorized personnel
 To prevent unauthorized use of the external interfaces of the TOE, operation of
those interfaces will be controlled by the TOE and its IT environment
4.4. 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:
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
 As with any evaluation, this evaluation only shows that the evaluated
configuration meets the security claims made, with a certain level of assurance
(EAL 2 augmented with ALC_FLR.2).
 This evaluation only covers the specific platforms and software version identified
in this document, and not any earlier or later versions released or in process.
In the evaluated configuration, the following options should be disabled:
 Network Accounting
 Copy/Print, Store and Reprint
 SMart eSolutions
 Xerox Extensible Interface Platform (EIP)
 USB direct printing
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
5. ARCHITECTURAL INFORMATION
5.1.Logical Scope and Boundary
The TOE logical scope and boundary consists of the security functions
provided/controlled by the TOE as follows:
 Image Overwrite. The TOE implements an image overwrite security function to
overwrite all temporary files created during processing of jobs.
 Information Flow Security. The TOE prevents unauthorized data flow between
the fax line interface and the network interface.
 Authentication. The TOE can be configured to authenticate users against an
internal database via username and password.
 Network Identification. The TOE can be configured to authenticate users against
an external database via username and password or smartcard and Personal
Identification Number (PIN).
 Security Audit. The TOE generates audit logs that track events/actions (e.g.,
copy/print/scan/fax job completion) to identified users.
 User Data Protection – SSL. The TOE implements the Secure Sockets Layer
(SSL) protocol to protect communication via the Web Graphical User Interface
(GUI) and to protect workflow scanning communications to an SSL enabled
repository.
 User Data Protection – IPSec. The TOE implements Internet Protocol Security
(IPSec) to protect print client communications.
 User Data Protection – Disk Encryption. The TOE implements AES data
encryption to protect all areas of the hard drive where user jobs are temporarily
stored for processing.
 User Data Protection – IP Filtering. The TOE provides the ability for the
system administrator to configure IPv4 filtering rules.
 Network Management Security. The TOE implements Simple Network
Management Protocol v3 (SNMP) for management communications via the
SNMP interface.
 Security Management. The security functions of the TOE are managed by the
system administrator from both the LUI and WebUI. User’s access to the TOE
functions, Job or Image Data stored inside the TOE is restricted, in accordance
with the applicable TOE Security Policies. The TOE is capable of verifying the
integrity of the TSF at the request of the administrator.
 Cryptographic Operations. The TOE utilizes data encryption (AES, RSA, RC4,
DES, TDES) and cryptographic checksum generation and secure hash
computation (MD5 and SHA-1), as provided by the OpenSSL cryptographic
libraries, to support secure communication between the TOE and remote trusted
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
products. The algorithms deployed have the associated Cryptographic Algorithm
Validation Program (CAVP) certificates: TDES – FIPS 46-3 (CAVP Certificate
No. 826 and CAVP Certificate No. 1174); AES - FIPS 197 (CAVP Certificate
No. 1131 and CAVP Certificate No. 1821); SHA-1 - FIPS 180-3 (CAVP
Certificate No. 1599), HMAC - FIPS 198 (CAVP Certificate No. 644 and
CAVP Certificate No. 1076); RSA - FIPS186-3 (CAVP Certificate No. 914).
The difference between the TOE models is their printing speed. The following figure
depicts the TOE’s architectural subsystems and its environment.
Figure 1: Depiction of TOE and Subsystems
5.2.Physical Scope and Boundary
The Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 is a multi-function device (MFD). The
physical boundary of the TOE consists of the MFD and optional fax accessory, and
accompanying user and administrator guidance listed in section 6.
In the evaluated configuration, the TOE is connected to the Public Switched
Telephone Network (PSTN) and the Local Area Network (LAN) as described in the
user guidance delivered with the TOE.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
The following figure depicts the TOE.
Figure 2: Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203
The various software and firmware that comprise the TOE are listed in Table 2. A
system administrator can ensure that they have a TOE by printing a configuration
sheet and comparing the version numbers reported on the sheet to the table below.
Table 2: Evaluated version
Software/Firmware
Item
ColorQube
9201/9202/9203
System Software 061.080.221.36200
Network Controller
Software
061.081.36140
User Interface Software 061.051.34940
Marking Engine Software 008.036.006
Copy Controller Software 061.051.35740
Document Feeder Software
(Options)
DADH 75 016.027.000
DADH 100 025.020.000
DADH 100 Quiet Mode 020.012.000
Finisher Software (Options)
LCSS 002.000.045
High Volume Feeder (HVF) 002.003.097
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
HVF with BookletMaker 010.020.000
Fax Software 003.010.004
Scanner Software 010.159.000
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
6. DOCUMENTATION
This section details the documentation that is (a) delivered to the customer, and (b) was
used as evidence for the evaluation of the Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203. Note
that not all evidence is available to customers. The following documentation is available
to the customer:
 ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 System Administrator Guide v1.0
 ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Interactive User Guide
 Secure Installation and Operation of Your ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 v1.3
The remaining evaluation evidence is described in the Evaluation Technical Report
developed by Computer Sciences Corporation.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
7. IT PRODUCT TESTING
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the evaluation team.
7.1. Developer testing
Test procedures were written by the developer and designed to be conducted using
manual interaction with the TOE interfaces. The developer tested all of the interfaces
to the TOE and in doing so tested all TSFs.
The developer tested the TOE consistent with the Common Criteria evaluated
configuration identified in the ST. The evaluation team analyzed the developer’s
testing to ensure adequate coverage for EAL 2. The evaluation team determined that
the developer’s actual test results matched the developer’s expected test results.
The evaluators assessed that the test environment used by the developers was
appropriate and mirrored the test configuration during independent testing.
7.2. Evaluation team independent testing
The evaluation team conducted independent testing at the CCTL facility. The TOE
was delivered in accordance with the documented delivery procedures. The
evaluation team installed and configured the TOE according to vendor installation
instructions and the evaluated configuration as identified in the Security Target.
The evaluation team confirmed the technical accuracy of the setup and installation
guide during installation of the TOE. The evaluation team confirmed that the TOE
version delivered for testing was identical to the version identified in the ST.
The evaluation team used the developer’s test plan as a basis for creating the
Independent Test Plan. The evaluation team analyzed the developer’s test procedures
to determine their relevance and adequacy to test the security function under test.
The following items represent a subset of the factors considered in selecting the
functional tests to be conducted:
 Security functions that implement critical security features
 Security functions critical to the TOE’s security objectives
 Security functions that gave rise to suspicion regarding the behavior of the
security features during the documentation evidence evaluation
 Security functions not tested adequately in the vendor’s test plan and procedures
The evaluation team repeated a sample of the developer’s test cases and designed
additional independent tests. The additional test coverage was determined based on
the analysis of the developer test coverage and the ST.
The evaluators examined the design evidence and selected an appropriate test
platform.
Each TOE Security Function was exercised and the evaluation team verified that each
test passed.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
7.3. Vulnerability analysis
The evaluation team performed a vulnerability analysis of the TOE evidence and a
search of publicly available information to identify potential vulnerabilities in the
TOE. Based on the results of this effort, the evaluation team conducted penetration
testing to determine if the identified potential vulnerabilities was indeed exploitable.
The evaluation team concluded that the TOE does not contain exploitable
vulnerabilities in the intended environment and for the postulated attackers.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
8. EVALUATED CONFIGURATION
In its evaluated configuration, IIO and ODIO (the Image Overwrite Security Package) are
installed and enabled on the TOE; SSL is enabled on the TOE; and User Authorization is
enabled on the TOE. The FAX (Xerox Embedded Fax accessory) option, if purchased by
the consumer, is installed and enabled on the TOE. The LanFax option is included in the
evaluated configuration of the TOE. USB Direct Printing is not included in the evaluated
configuration of the TOE.
Please see http://www.xerox.com/information-security/product/enus.html for more
specific information about maintaining the security of this TOE.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
9. RESULTS OF THE EVALUATION
The evaluation was carried out in accordance with the Common Criteria Evaluation and
Validation Scheme (CCEVS) processes and procedures. The TOE was evaluated against
the criteria contained in the Common Criteria for Information Technology Security
Evaluation, Version 3.1R2. The evaluation methodology used by the evaluation team to
conduct the evaluation is the Common Methodology for Information Technology
Security Evaluation, Version 3.1R2.
Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) has determined that the product meets the security
criteria in the Security Target, which specifies an assurance level of EAL 2 augmented
with ALC_FLR.3. A team of Validators, on behalf of the CCEVS Validation Body,
monitored the evaluation. The evaluation effort was finished on November 5, 2012. A
final Validation Oversight Review (VOR) was held on December 11, 2012 and final
changes to the VR were completed on December 21, 2012.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
10. VALIDATOR COMMENTS
No product features (or lack thereof), configuration considerations, or environmental
assumptions need to be noted for the customer, except for the following.
An observation decision generated by a similar product produced by the same vendor was
determined to be applicable to this product. The problem is that it is possible, though not
very likely, that the audit trail can be filled in a matter of hours. The applicable
resolution is:
Because this model is no longer produced but still being used, Xerox must amend their
user guidance to provide information about the possible security vulnerability, including
guidance about monitoring the audit logs to safeguard the entries.
Customers of this product should verify that their administrative procedures include
periodic checks of the audit log.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
11. ANNEXES
None
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
12. SECURITY TARGET
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Security Target, Version 1.0, Revision 1.11, 19th
December 2012
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
13. GLOSSARY
 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.
 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.
 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.
 Threat: Means through which the ability or intent of a threat agent to adversely
affect the primary functionality of the TOE, facility that contains the TOE, or
malicious operation directed towards the TOE. A potential violation of security.
 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.
 Vulnerabilities: A vulnerability is a hardware, firmware, or software flaw that
leaves an Automated Information System (AIS) open for potential exploitation. A
weakness in automated system security procedures, administrative controls, physical
layout, internal controls, and so forth, which could be exploited by a threat to gain
unauthorized access to information or disrupt critical processing.
Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Validation Report, Version 1.0
14. BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.) Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation – Part 1:
Introduction and general model, dated September 2006, Version 3.1, Revision 1,
CCMB-2006-09-001.
2.) Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation – Part 2: Security
functional requirements, dated September 2007, Version 3.1, Revision 2, CCMB-
2007-09-002.
3.) Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation – Part 3: Security
assurance requirements, dated September 2007, Version 3.1, Revision 2, CCMB-
2007-09-003.
4.) Common Evaluation Methodology for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
dated September 2007, Version 3.1, Revision 2, CCMB-2007-09-004.
5.) Xerox ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203 Security Target, Version 1.0, Revision 1.11,
19th
December 2012
6.) Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) Evaluation Technical Report for Xerox
ColorQube™ 9201/9202/9203, Version 1.0, 5 November 2012.