commoncriteria / commoncriteria/transforms

SFR dependencies should be represented in a useful form

Open
#103 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
XSLT
Stars
1
Forks
4
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

The thing we currently call the "Inherently Satisfied Requirements" appendix should really be presented at the end of the SFRs in the section we call "Security Requirements Rationale." This section should contain the rationales for not including SFRs that are dependencies of SFRs that are in the PP.

For CC requirements, dependencies are found in the CC catalog, from whence they will somehow have to be extracted.

For extended requirements, dependencies are in the element. Currently this is just text, but it should be references to SFRs (probably cc-ids).

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

No files or tests are named. Start by tracing how the Security Requirements Rationale and Inherently Satisfied Requirements appendix are produced, then inspect the CC catalog dependency data and the extended-requirement element. Done means dependencies appear as rationale entries, with CC dependencies extracted from the catalog and extended dependencies represented as SFR references such as cc-ids.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
xml
Domain
security, tooling
Issue type
Feature
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.