National Information Assurance Partnership
Common Criteria Evaluation and Validation Scheme
Validation Report
for
Tenable.sc 5.15.0
Report Number: CCEVS-VR-VID11054-2020
Dated: 7 December 2020
Version: 1.0
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Information Technology Laboratory
100 Bureau Drive
Gaithersburg, MD 20899
National Security Agency
Information Assurance Directorate
9800 Savage Road STE 6940
Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6940
®
TM
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
i
Acknowledgements
Validation Team
Jerome F. Myers, PhD
Marybeth Panock
The Aerospace Corporation
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
Leidos Inc.
Columbia, MD
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
ii
Table of Contents
1 Executive Summary................................................................................................................... 1
2 Identification............................................................................................................................. 2
3 TOE Architecture....................................................................................................................... 4
4 Security Policy........................................................................................................................... 6
4.1 Timely Security Updates ...............................................................................................................6
4.2 Cryptographic Support..................................................................................................................6
4.3 User Data Protection.....................................................................................................................6
4.4 Identification and Authentication.................................................................................................6
4.5 Security Management...................................................................................................................6
4.6 Privacy...........................................................................................................................................7
4.7 Protection of the TSF ....................................................................................................................7
4.8 Trusted Path/Channels .................................................................................................................7
5 Assumptions.............................................................................................................................. 8
6 Clarification of Scope ................................................................................................................ 9
7 Documentation ....................................................................................................................... 10
8 IT Product Testing ................................................................................................................... 11
8.1 Developer Testing .......................................................................................................................11
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing .......................................................................................11
8.3 Test Configuration.......................................................................................................................11
9 TOE Evaluated Configuration.................................................................................................. 13
9.1 Evaluated Configuration .............................................................................................................13
9.2 Excluded Functionality................................................................................................................13
10 Results of the Evaluation ........................................................................................................ 14
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ST) (ASE)...............................................................................14
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)........................................................................................14
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD)...........................................................................14
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC)..................................................................14
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE) ...........................................15
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (AVA).....................................................................................15
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results ..................................................................................................15
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations ............................................................................... 16
12 Security Target........................................................................................................................ 17
13 Abbreviations and Acronyms.................................................................................................. 18
14 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................ 19
List of Tables
Table 1: Evaluation Identifiers 2
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
1
1 Executive Summary
This report documents the National Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP) assessment of the
evaluation of Tenable.sc 5.15.0 (also known as SecurityCenter 5.15.0) (the Target of Evaluation, or TOE).
It presents the evaluation results, their justifications, and the conformance results. This Validation Report
(VR) is not an endorsement of the TOE by any agency of the U.S. Government and no warranty of the TOE
is either expressed or implied.
The evaluation was performed by Leidos Common Criteria Testing Laboratory (CCTL) in Columbia,
Maryland, USA, and was completed in December 2020. The information in this report is largely derived
from the Evaluation Technical Report (ETR) and associated test report, all written by Leidos. The
evaluation determined that the TOE is:
 Common Criteria Part 2 Extended and Part 3 Conformant
and demonstrates exact conformance to:
 Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019 [5]
 Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019 [6]
as clarified by all applicable Technical Decisions.
The TOE is Tenable.sc (also known as SecurityCenter) 5.15.0, supported on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL)
7.
The TOE identified in this Validation Report has been evaluated at a NIAP approved Common Criteria
Testing Laboratory (CCTL) 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 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 documented in the Evaluation
Technical Report (ETR) and the Assurance Activities Report (AAR). The validation team found that the
evaluation showed that the product satisfies all the functional requirements and assurance requirements
stated in the Security Target (ST). The conclusions of the testing laboratory in the evaluation technical
report are consistent with the evidence produced. Therefore, the validation team concludes that the
testing laboratory's findings are accurate, the conclusions justified, and the conformance results are
correct.
The Leidos evaluation team determined that the product meets the Common Criteria requirements of the
Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019 and the Functional Package for
Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019. The technical information included in this
report was obtained from the Tenable.sc Security Target, Version 1.0, 4 December 2020 and analysis
performed by the validation team.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
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, commercial testing laboratories called Common Criteria Testing Laboratories (CCTLs) use the
Common Criteria and Common Methodology for IT Security Evaluation (CEM) to conduct security
evaluations, 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 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 Product Compliant List (PCL).
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)—the unique identification of the document describing the security
features, claims, and assurances of the product
 The conformance result of the evaluation
 The PP/PP-Modules 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 Tenable.sc 5.15.0
Protection Profiles  Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March
2019
 Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12
February 2019
Security Target Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Security Target, Version 1.0, 4 December 2020
Evaluation Technical
Report
 Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Part 1 (Leidos
Non-Proprietary), Version 1.1, 4 December 2020.
 Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Part 2 (Leidos
Proprietary), Version 1.1, 4 December 2020.
CC Version Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation,
Version 3.1, Release 5, April 2017
Conformance Result CC Part 2 Extended and CC Part 3 Conformant
Sponsor Tenable, Inc.
Developer Tenable, Inc.
Common Criteria Testing
Laboratory (CCTL)
Leidos
Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
6841 Benjamin Franklin Drive
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
3
Item Identifier
Columbia, MD 21046
Validation Personnel Jerome F. Myers, PhD
Marybeth Panock
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
4
3 TOE Architecture
Note: The following architectural description is based on the description presented in the Security Target.
Tenable.sc is a vulnerability management product that is designed to provide visibility into network and
system assets. The product is used to discover and scan assets such as servers, endpoints, network
devices, operating systems, database, and applications. Information collected by Tenable.sc through its
various connections to its operational environment and aggregated into the product can be presented in
various customizable dashboards and analyzed by the product to determine the risk levels of findings or
non-compliance with organizational security policies.
The Tenable.sc TOE consists of the Tenable.sc application, which is a C application with a PHP web front-
end running on Apache. The TOE is a Linux application.
The following figure depicts the TOE in a sample deployment with other Tenable applications in its
operational environment.
Figure 1 – Example Deployment
Tenable.sc
Nessus Manager
Nessus Network
Monitor
Log
Configuration
Engine
Remote Admin
Remote Log
Sources
TCP/8835 (HTTPS)
Network Assets
Nessus Agent
Monitored Client
TOE Component
Environmental Component
TSF Interface
Non-TSF Interface
TCP/443 (HTTPS)
TCP/8834 (HTTPS)
TCP/8834 (HTTPS)
TCP/8835 (HTTPS)
TCP/8836 (HTTPS)
TCP/1243 (HTTPS)
TCP/8834 (HTTPS)
TCP/22 (SSH)
various
various
The TOE has the following system requirements for its host platform:
 4x 2GHz cores
 8 GB RAM
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
5
 125 GB disk storage (either direct-attached or network-attached storage is permitted if storage
latency is 10 ms or less)
 Gigabit Ethernet
These system requirements reflect the lightest usage scenarios for the TOE. Additional factors such as
network size and storage retention requirements will affect the system requirements for a particular
deployment. Refer to the relevant Guidance Section (as referenced in Section 7 Documentation) for the
specific system requirements that apply to a given deployment.
The following network ports must be open for the TOE to function:
 TCP/443 (for administrator communications)
 TCP/22 (for communications with LCE)
 TCP/1243 (for communications with LCE)
Additional network ports must be open, but these are configurable if the default ports cannot be used.
The connections and their default ports are as follows:
 TCP/8834 (for communications with Nessus Manager)
 TCP/8835 (for communications with NNM)
 TCP/8836 (for communications with LCE)
The TOE’s operational environment includes the following:
 Other Tenable components (one or more instances of Nessus Manager, Nessus Agent, NNM, and
LCE applications).
 Platform (hardware and software) on which the TOE is hosted.
o The TOE can run on a general-purpose Linux operating system on standard consumer-
grade hardware on either a physical or virtual machine. For the evaluated configuration,
the TOE was tested on a virtualized instance of RHEL 7 running on VMware ESXi 6.5 on a
system using an AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X processor with the Zen
microarchitecture.
 Full disk encryption is required for the TOE platform to ensure adequate data-at-rest protection.
 The platform on which the TOE is deployed is required to provide SSH client functionality through
its host operating system.
 Web browser used to access the GUI interface.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
6
4 Security Policy
The TOE enforces the following security policies as described in the ST.
Note: Much of the description of the security policy has been derived from the ST and the Final ETR.
4.1 Timely Security Updates
The TOE developer has internal mechanisms for receiving reports of security flaws, tracking product
vulnerabilities, and distributing software updates to customers in a timely manner.
4.2 Cryptographic Support
The TOE implements cryptography to protect data at rest and in transit.
For data at rest, the TOE stores credential data (both to log in to the TOE and to log in to remote systems
for the purpose of conducting authenticated configuration scanning) as well as passphrase data used to
protect PKI certificates that the TOE uses to authenticate to environmental components. This stored data
is encrypted using AES or a password-based key derivation function (PBKDF), depending on the data that
is being stored.
For data in transit, the TOE implements TLS/HTTPS as both a client and a server. The TOE implements a
TLS server for its administrative interface while it implements a TLS client to communicate with
environmental components, including other Tenable products. The TOE supports mutual authentication
as a TLS client.
The TOE implements all cryptography used for these functions using its own implementations of OpenSSL
with NIST-approved algorithms. The TOE’s DRBG is seeded using entropy from the underlying OS platform.
Some product functionality requires the use of SSH; the TOE does not claim SSH functionality as it invokes
its platform to implement this.
4.3 User Data Protection
The TOE uses cryptographic mechanisms to protect sensitive data at rest. Credential data is protected
using a PBKDF while all other sensitive data is protected by the TOE platform’s use of full disk encryption.
The TOE relies on the network connectivity and system log capabilities of its host OS platform. The TOE
supports user-initiated and application-initiated uses of the network.
4.4 Identification and Authentication
The TOE supports X.509 certificate validation as part of establishing TLS and HTTPS connections. The TOE
supports various certificate validity checking methods and can also check certificate revocation status
using OCSP. If the validity status of a certificate cannot be determined, the certificate will be accepted. All
other cases where a certificate is found to be invalid will result in rejection without an administrative
override.
4.5 Security Management
The TOE itself and the configuration settings it uses are stored in locations recommended by the platform
vendor.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
7
The TOE includes a web GUI and a REST API. The web GUI and REST API enforce username/password
authentication using locally stored credentials that are created using the TOE. The TOE does not include
a default user account to access its management interface.
The security-relevant management functions supported by the TOE relate to the configuration of how
frequently the various environmental components access network resources and for the transmission and
presentation of system, network, and log data that the TOE obtains from its operational environment.
4.6 Privacy
The TOE does not handle Personally Identifiable Information (PII) of any individuals.
4.7 Protection of the TSF
The TOE enforces various mechanisms to prevent itself from being used as an attack vector to its host OS
platform. The TOE: implements address space layout randomization (ASLR); does not allocate any memory
with both write and execute permissions; does not write user-modifiable files to directories that contain
executable files; is compiled using stack overflow protection; and is compatible with the security features
of its host OS platform.
The TOE contains libraries and invokes system APIs that are well-known and explicitly identified.
The TOE has a mechanism to determine its current software version. Software updates to the TOE can be
acquired by leveraging its OS platform. All updates are digitally signed to guarantee their authenticity and
integrity.
4.8 Trusted Path/Channels
The TOE encrypts sensitive data in transit between itself and its operational environment using TLS and
HTTPS. It facilitates the transmission of sensitive data from remote users over TLS and HTTPS.
The TOE may also invoke OS platform functionality to establish SSH communications with an instance of
LCE in its operational environment.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
8
5 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.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
9
6 Clarification of Scope
All evaluations (and all products) have limitations, as well as potential misconceptions that may benefit
from need clarification. This text covers some of the more important limitations and clarifications of this
evaluation. Note that:
 As with any evaluation, this evaluation only shows that the evaluated configuration meets the
security claims made, with a certain level of assurance (the evaluation activities specified in
Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019 [5] and in Functional
Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019 [6], and performed by
the evaluation team).
 Consistent with the expectations of the Protection Profile, this evaluation did not specifically
search for, nor seriously attempt to counter, 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 evaluation of security functionality of the product was limited to the functionality specified
in the claimed PPs. Any additional security related functional capabilities included in the product
were not covered by this evaluation. In particular, the functionality listed in Section 9.2 of this
document is not covered.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
10
7 Documentation
Tenable 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:
 Tenable.sc 5.15.x User Guide, Last Revised: October 29, 2020
 Tenable.sc API Guide (https://docs.tenable.com/sccv/api/index.html)
To use the product in the evaluated configuration, the product must be configured as specified in the sub-
section “Configure Tenable.sc for NIAP Compliance” found within Tenable.sc 5.15.x User Guide.
The documentation listed above is the only documentation that should be trusted to install, administer,
or use the TOE in its evaluated configuration. Any additional customer documentation provided with the
product, or that which may be available online, was not included in the scope of the evaluation and
therefore should not be relied upon to configure or operate the device as evaluated. Consumers are
encouraged to download the evaluated administrative guidance documentation from the NIAP website.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
11
8 IT Product Testing
This section describes the testing efforts of the developer and the evaluation team. The information is
derived from the Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Part 2 (Leidos Proprietary), Version
1.1, 4 December 2020 [ETR Prop-P2] and the test report, Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Common Criteria Test Report
and Procedures, Version 1.1, 4 December 2020 [12], which are listed in the bibliography section 14 of this
document. A non-proprietary description of the tests performed, and their results is provided in the
Assurance Activities Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Version 1.1, 4 December 2020 [11].
8.1 Developer Testing
No evidence of developer testing is required in the Assurance Activities for this product.
8.2 Evaluation Team Independent Testing
The purpose of the testing activity was to confirm the TOE behaves in accordance with the TOE security
functional requirements as specified in the ST for a product that claims conformance to Protection Profile
for Application Software ([5]) and Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS) ([6]).
The evaluation team devised a Test Plan based on the Testing Assurance Activities specified in Protection
Profile for Application Software and Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS). The Test Plan
described how each test activity was to be instantiated within the TOE test environment. The evaluation
team executed the tests specified in the Test Plan and documented the results in the team test report
listed above.
Independent testing took place at Leidos CCTL facilities in Columbia, Maryland. Testing occurred from
January 14, 2020 to October 23, 2020; testing was completed in October 2020.
The evaluators received the TOE in the form that customers would receive it, installed and configured the
TOE in accordance with the vendor-provided guidance, and exercised the Team Test Plan on equipment
configured in the testing laboratory. The Independent Testing activity is documented in the Assurance
Activities Report (AAR), which is publicly available, and is not duplicated here. A description of the test
configurations and the test tools may be found in Section 2.8 of that report.
Given the complete set of test results from the test procedures exercised by the evaluators, the testing
requirements for Protection Profile for Application Software and Functional Package for Transport Layer
Security (TLS) were fulfilled.
8.3 Test Configuration
The evaluation team established a test configuration comprising:
 TOE components:
o Tenable.sc 5.15.0, running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7.7. RHEL itself was
running on ESXi 6.5 on AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X (Zen)
 Operational and test environment components:
o Tenable Nessus Agent on Linux RHEL 7.7
o Tenable Nessus Agent on Windows Server 2016 Standard
o Tenable Nessus Manager running on Windows Server 2016 Standard
o Tenable Nessus Manager running on RHEL 7.7
o Tenable Nessus Network Monitor on Windows Server 2016 Standard
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
12
o Tenable Nessus Network Monitor on RHEL 7.7
o Tenable Log Correlation Engine on RHEL 7.7
o Linux TLS Test Server.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
13
9 TOE Evaluated Configuration
9.1 Evaluated Configuration
The TOE consists of the Tenable.sc 5.15.0 application, which is a C application with a PHP web front-end
running on Apache. The TOE is a Linux application that is configured in accordance with the section of the
Tenable.sc 5.15.x User Guide, described in Section 7, “Configure Tenable.sc for NIAP Compliance”.
The TOE is evaluated on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.
The TOE has the following system requirements for its host platform:
 4x 2GHz cores
 8 GB RAM
 125 GB disk storage (either direct-attached or network-attached storage is permitted if storage
latency is 10 ms or less)
 Gigabit Ethernet
The TOE requires the following in its operational environment:
 Other Tenable components (one or more instances of Nessus Manager, Nessus Agent, NNM, and
LCE applications).
 Platform (hardware and software) on which the TOE is hosted.
o In the evaluated configuration, RHEL 7 is the supported OS platform.
 Full disk encryption is required for the TOE platform to ensure adequate data-at-rest protection.
 The platform on which the TOE is deployed is required to provide SSH client functionality through
its host operating system.
 Web browser used to access the GUI interface.
9.2 Excluded Functionality
The TOE’s scanning, data collection, vulnerability analysis, analytics, and incident response capabilities are
outside the scope of the TOE, as is any other product behavior that is not described in the App PP or TLS
Package. The content and execution of plugins is similarly excluded from the TOE, although they are
discussed in the context of network communications because the TSF must use platform network
resources to acquire them and make them available to environmental applications.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
14
10 Results of the Evaluation
The results of the evaluation of the TOE against its target assurance requirements are generally described
in this section and are presented in detail in the proprietary Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc
Part 2 ([10]). The reader of this VR can assume that all assurance activities and work units received passing
verdicts.
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,
revision 5 ([1], [2], [3]) and CEM version 3.1, revision 5 ([4]), and the specific evaluation activities specified
in Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019 ([5]) and Functional Package for
Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019 ([6]). The evaluation determined the TOE
satisfies the conformance claims made in the Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Security Target, of Part 2 extended and
Part 3 extended. The TOE satisfies the requirements specified in:
 Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019 ([5])
 Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019 ([6]).
The Validators reviewed all the work of the evaluation team and agreed with their practices and findings.
10.1 Evaluation of the Security Target (ST) (ASE)
The evaluation team performed each TSS assurance activity and ASE CEM work unit. The ST evaluation
ensured the ST contains an ST introduction, TOE overview, TOE description, security problem definition in
terms of threats, policies and assumptions, description of security objectives for the operational
environment, a statement of security requirements claimed to be met by the product that are consistent
with the claimed Protection Profile, and security function descriptions that satisfy the requirements.
10.2 Evaluation of the Development (ADV)
The evaluation team performed each ADV assurance activity and applied each ADV_FSP.1 CEM work unit.
The evaluation team assessed the evaluation evidence and found it adequate to meet the requirements
specified in the claimed Protection Profile for design evidence. The ADV evidence consists of the TSS
descriptions provided in the ST and product guidance documentation providing descriptions of the TOE
external interfaces.
10.3 Evaluation of the Guidance Documents (AGD)
The evaluation team performed each guidance assurance activity and applied each AGD work unit. The
evaluation team determined the adequacy of the operational user guidance in describing how to operate
the TOE in accordance with the descriptions in the ST. The evaluation team followed the guidance in the
TOE preparative procedures to test the installation and configuration procedures to ensure the
procedures result in the evaluated configuration. The guidance documentation was assessed during the
design and testing phases of the evaluation to ensure it was complete.
10.4 Evaluation of the Life Cycle Support Activities (ALC)
The evaluation team performed each ALC assurance activity and applied each ALC_CMC.1 and ALC_CMS.1
CEM work unit, to the extent possible given the evaluation evidence required by the claimed Protection
Profiles. The evaluation team ensured the TOE is labeled with a unique identifier consistent with the TOE
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
15
identification in the evaluation evidence, and that the ST describes how timely security updates are made
to the TOE.
10.5 Evaluation of the Test Documentation and the Test Activity (ATE)
The evaluation team performed each test activity and applied each ATE_FUN.1 CEM work unit. The
evaluation team ran the set of tests specified by the claimed PP and recorded the results in the Test
Report, summarized in the AAR.
10.6 Vulnerability Assessment Activity (AVA)
The evaluation team performed each AVA assurance activity and applied each AVA_VAN.1 CEM work unit.
The evaluation team performed a vulnerability analysis following the processes described in the claimed
PP. This comprised performance of a virus scan on the installation packages for the TOE and a search of
public vulnerability databases. The virus scans did not detect any virus or malware in any of the TOE
installation packages.
Searches of public vulnerability repositories were performed on 4 December 2020.
The evaluation team searched the following public vulnerability repositories.
 National Vulnerability Database (http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/search)
 SecurityFocus Database (https://www.securityfocus.com/vulnerabilities)
 US-CERT Vulnerability Notes Database (https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/).
The evaluation team used the following search terms in the searches of these repositories:
 “tenable”
 “tenable.sc”
 “securitycenter”
 “security center”
 “tls v1.2”
 “openssl 1.1.1d”
The results of these searches did not identify any vulnerabilities that are applicable to the TOE. The
conclusion drawn from the vulnerability analysis is that no residual vulnerabilities exist that are
exploitable by attackers with Basic Attack Potential as defined by the Certification Body in accordance
with the guidance in the CEM.
10.7 Summary of Evaluation Results
The evaluation team’s assessment of the evaluation evidence demonstrates that the claims in the ST are
met, sufficient to satisfy the assurance activities specified in the claimed Protection Profiles. 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.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
16
11 Validator Comments/Recommendations
The validators suggest 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 security
functional requirements specified in the Security Target, and the only evaluated functionality was that
which was described by the SFRs claimed in the Security Target.
Note that there is not a separate Common Criteria Configuration Guide. The information needed to use
the product in the evaluated configuration, it must be configured as specified in the sub-section
“Configure Tenable.sc for NIAP Compliance” found within Tenable.sc 5.15.x User Guide.
All other functionality provided, to include software, firmware, or hardware that was not part of the
evaluated configuration needs to be assessed separately and no further conclusions can be drawn about
their effectiveness. The excluded functionality is specified in section 9.2 of this report.
All other items and scope issues have been sufficiently addressed elsewhere in this document.
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
17
12 Security Target
The ST for this product’s evaluation is Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Security Target, Version 1.0, 4 December 2020
[7].
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
18
13 Abbreviations and Acronyms
This section identifies abbreviations and acronyms used in this document.
API Application Programming Interface
CC Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation
CCTL Common Criteria Testing Laboratory
CEM Common Evaluation Methodology
ETR Evaluation Technical Report
IT Information Technology
OCSP Online Certificate Status Protocol
PCL Product Compliant List
PII Personally Identifiable Information
REST Representational State Transfer
RHEL Red Hat Enterprise Linux
SAR Security Assurance Requirement
SFR Security Functional Requirement
ST Security Target
TOE Target of Evaluation
TSF TOE Security Functions
TSS TOE Summary Specification
VR Validation Report
Tenable.sc Validation Report Version 1.0
4 December 2020
19
14 Bibliography
The validation team used the following documents to produce this VR:
[1] Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organizations. Common Criteria for Information Technology
Security Evaluation: Part 1: Introduction and general model, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[2] Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organizations. Common Criteria for Information Technology
Security Evaluation: Part 2: Security functional components, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[3] Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organizations. Common Criteria for Information Technology
Security Evaluation: Part 3: Security assurance requirements, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[4] Common Criteria Project Sponsoring Organizations. Common Evaluation Methodology for
Information Technology Security, Version 3.1, Revision 5, April 2017.
[5] Protection Profile for Application Software, Version 1.3, 1 March 2019.
[6] Functional Package for Transport Layer Security (TLS), Version 1.1, 12 February 2019.
[7] Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Security Target, Version 1.0, 4 December 2020. [ST]
[8] Tenable.sc 5.15.x User Guide, Last Revised: October 29, 2020. [User Guide]
[9] Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Part 1 (Leidos Non-Proprietary), Version 1.1, 4
December 2020 [ETR P1]
[10] Evaluation Technical Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Part 2 (Leidos Proprietary), Version 1.1, 4
December 2020. [ETR P2]
[11] Assurance Activities Report for Tenable.sc 5.15.0, Version 1.1, 4 December 2020. [AAR]
[12] Tenable.sc 5.15.0 Common Criteria Test Report and Procedures, Version 1.1, 4 December 2020.
[DTR]
[13] Tenable.sc Vulnerability Assessment, Version 1.1, 4 December 2020 [AVA]