ISAC FOR IDENTITY AND QTSP

TG4 – Interpretation & Methodology

Aligning security interpretations, testing practices and identity business risk assessment.

How should security be tested and evaluated consistently?

The second pillar of the Technical Assurance Framework maintains common, consistent and current testing and evaluation practices. It addresses methodological issues raised by laboratories, CABs and other members and reflects evolving attack capabilities in evaluation.

Activities

  • Develop common testing and evaluation methodologies, principles and criteria.
  • Interpret security requirements, Attack Methods and test results.
  • Support consistency between laboratories and conformity assessment bodies.
  • Address new attack techniques through Application Notes and Methodology Decisions.
  • Identify gaps and review certification schemes, their assumptions and requirements.
  • Analyse dematerialised identity business risks, including PIDs, electronic attestations, enrolment, acceptance and trust-service dependencies.

Planned outputs

  • Technical Interpretations and Certification Scheme Reviews
  • Evaluation Methodologies and Application Notes
  • Methodology Decisions
  • Dematerialised Identity Business Risk Analysis
  • Testing Methodologies developed with TG3

Coordination and validation

The Steering Committee coordinates the groups and validates critical deliverables before adoption or external use. Confidentiality rules apply to operational information and its distribution.

Take part in the ISAC.

Contribute to threat analysis, technical testing or evaluation methods.