Liam,
He probably can't say. However I still don't think CC security evaluation is
anything like a mathematical proof the program works as specified, it is also very
expensive and time consuming...
<sorry I wanted to put some CC links in here but the web site does not respond.>
You might like (or perhaps not) to note that the UK also has what I understand is a lower
level of assurance called "foundation level". I recently installed the Microsoft
Windows/2012 Direct Access feature for the council where I formally worked. It is
interesting to note that despite the product being certified to Foundation Level, which is
a also rigorous process:-
http://www.cesg.gov.uk/servicecatalogue/Product-Assurance/CPA/Pages/Foundat…
http://www.cesg.gov.uk/servicecatalogue/Product-Assurance/CPA/Pages/CPA-and…
they still recommend additional firewalls and an Intrusion Protection System...
Dave
G4UGM
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at
classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at
classiccmp.org] On Behalf
Of Liam Proven
Sent: 28 September 2014 11:33
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Who is the world's oldest working programmer?
On 27 September 2014 22:59, Paul Koning <paulkoning at comcast.net> wrote:
Then I found out about a real-time OS that was
evaluated under the Common Criteria security standards to EAL 7 (the highest level), a
year or two ago. Take a look at what the description for that level says; it?s pretty
close to proof of correctness, perhaps the actual thing. And that was for a commercial
product with real world applications.
Name? Company? Any kind of a clue at all?
--
Liam Proven ? Profile:
http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at
hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)