Brainstorm all the time. The best way to decide on two good compare and contrast topics to analyze is to brainstorm and write down possible versions on a blank paper.
Characteristics of these organizations were examined and presented at ICCC Evaluations at EAL5 and above tend to involve the security requirements of the host nation's government.
In Septembera majority of members of the CCRA produced a vision statement whereby mutual recognition of CC evaluated products will be lowered to EAL 2 Including augmentation with flaw remediation. Further, this vision indicates a move away from assurance levels altogether and evaluations will be confined to conformance with Protection Profiles that have no stated assurance level.
This will be achieved through technical working groups developing worldwide PPs, and as yet a transition period has not been fully determined.
Major changes to the Arrangement include: The emergence of international Technical Communities iTCgroups of technical experts charged with the creation of cPPs. A transition plan from the previous CCRA, including recognition of certificates issued under the previous version of the Arrangement.
Requirements[ edit ] Common Criteria is very generic; it does not directly provide a list of product security requirements or features for specific classes of products: Value of certification[ edit ] Common Criteria certification cannot guarantee security, but it can ensure that claims about the security attributes of the evaluated product were independently verified.
In other words, products evaluated against a Common Criteria standard exhibit a clear chain of evidence that the process of specification, implementation, and evaluation has been conducted in a rigorous and standard manner. Various Microsoft Windows versions, including Windows Server and Windows XPhave been certifiedbut security patches to address security vulnerabilities are still getting published by Microsoft for these Windows systems.
This is possible because the process of obtaining a Common Criteria certification allows a vendor to restrict the analysis to certain security features and to make certain assumptions about the operating environment and the strength of threats faced by the product in that environment. Additionally, the CC recognizes a need to limit the scope of evaluation in order to provide cost-effective and useful security certifications, such that evaluated products are examined to a level of detail specified by the assurance level or PP.
Evaluations activities are therefore only performed to a certain depth, use of time, and resources and offer reasonable assurance for the intended environment. In the Microsoft case, the assumptions include A. The TOE is applicable to networked or distributed environments only if the entire network operates under the same constraints and resides within a single management domain.
There are no security requirements that address the need to trust external systems or the communications links to such systems. Based on this and other assumptions, which may not be realistic for the common use of general-purpose operating systems, the claimed security functions of the Windows products are evaluated.
Thus they should only be considered secure in the assumed, specified circumstances, also known as the evaluated configuration. Whether you run Microsoft Windows in the precise evaluated configuration or not, you should apply Microsoft's security patches for the vulnerabilities in Windows as they continue to appear.
If any of these security vulnerabilities are exploitable in the product's evaluated configuration, the product's Common Criteria certification should be voluntarily withdrawn by the vendor.
Alternatively, the vendor should re-evaluate the product to include the application of patches to fix the security vulnerabilities within the evaluated configuration.
Failure by the vendor to take either of these steps would result in involuntary withdrawal of the product's certification by the certification body of the country in which the product was evaluated. This shows both the limitation and strength of an evaluated configuration.
Objections outlined in the article include: Evaluation focuses primarily on assessing the evaluation documentation, not on the actual security, technical correctness or merits of the product itself.
The effort and time necessary to prepare evaluation evidence and other evaluation-related documentation is so cumbersome that by the time the work is completed, the product in evaluation is generally obsolete. Industry input, including that from organizations such as the Common Criteria Vendor's Forumgenerally has little impact on the process as a whole.
In a research paper, computer specialist David A.
Wheeler suggested that the Common Criteria process discriminates against free and open-source software FOSS -centric organizations and development models.
In contrast, much FOSS software is produced using modern agile paradigms. Although some have argued that both paradigms do not align well,  others have attempted to reconcile both paradigms. The UK has also produced a number of alternative schemes when the timescales, costs and overheads of mutual recognition have been found to be impeding the operation of the market:Information systems science is an expansive area in our present society.
It is the scientiﬁc discipline that studies human interaction with information systems (IS) in different business settings.
The subject focuses on developing knowledge of the use of information technology (IT) . The Common Criteria for Information Technology Security Evaluation TCSEC – The United States Department of Defense DoD Std, called the Orange Book and parts of the Rainbow Series. In contrast, much FOSS software is produced using modern agile paradigms.
Compare and Contrast Essay Topics: Education You can compare and contrast different facets of education until you are as blue as a Smurf. To succeed, you’re better served by pitting two very specific elements of education against each other.
Assignment - Comparison and Contrast on TCSEC, CC, SSE-CMM and ISO - Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online.
Scribd is the world's largest social reading and publishing site. Authoritative introduction to Socio-Technical System Design by Brian Whitworth and Adnan Ahmad. CC-Att-SA-2 (Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike Unported). Figure Charles Babbage () designed the first automatic computing engines.
He invented computers but failed to build them. but information technology (IT) is. Compare and Contrast essays are learning-process essays. You learn about your subject as you gather and organize information. This type of essay takes a bit of organization, and it's this organizational process, this gathering of facts, that helps you learn as you go.