Certification Standards - Using Event-B for Critical Device Software Systems - page 313

EAL4: Methodically Designed, Tested, and Reviewed. It applies when develop-
ers or users require moderate to high independently assured security in conven-
tional commodity products and are prepared to incur additional security-specific
engineering costs.
EAL5: Semi-formally Designed and Tested. It applies when developers or users
require high, independently assured security in a planned development and re-
quire a rigorous development approach that does not incur unreasonable costs
from specialist security engineering techniques.
EAL6: Semi-formally Verified Design and Tested. It applies when developing
security targets of evaluation for application in high-risk situations where the
value of the protected assets justifies the additional costs.
EAL7: Formally Verified Design and Tested. It applies to the development of se-
curity targets of evaluation for application in extremely high-risk situations, as
well as when the high value of the assets justifies the higher costs.

References

1. CC. Common criteria. http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/ .
2. CC (2009). Common criteria for information technology security evaluation, part 1: Introduc-
tion and general model. http://www.iec.ch/ .
3. CC (2009). Common criteria for information technology security evaluation, part 2: Security
functional requirements. http://www.iec.ch/ .
4. CC (2009). Common criteria for information technology security evaluation, part 3: Security
assurance components. http://www.iec.ch/ .
5. CDRH (2006). Safety of marketed medical devices. Center for Devices and Radiological
Health, US FDA.
6. Duce, D. A. (1997). Formal methods and standards: An idiosyncratic view. In Proceedings of
the 2nd BCS-FACS conference on northern formal methods , 2FACS'97 (p. 5). Swinton: British
Computer Society.
7. FDA. Food and Drug Administration. http://www.fda.gov/ .
8. Fries, R. C. (2011). Handbook of medical device design . New York: Dekker.
9. Gall, H. (2008). Functional safety IEC 61508/IEC 61511 the impact to certification and the
user. In Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/ACS international conference on computer systems and
applications , AICCSA'08 (pp. 1027-1031). Washington: IEEE Comput. Soc.
10. Huhn, M., & Zechner, A. (2010). Arguing for software quality in an IEC 62304 compliant
development process. In T. Margaria & B. Steffen (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science:
Vo l . 6416. Leveraging applications of formal methods, verification, and validation (pp. 296-
311). Berlin: Springer.
11. IEC62304 (2006). International Electrotechnical Commission: Medical device software—
software life-cycle processes. http://www.iec.ch/ .
12. IEC61508 (2008). IEC functional safety and IEC 61508: Working draft on functional safety
of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems. http://www.iec.ch/ .
13. IEEE-SA. IEEE Standards Association. http://standards.ieee.org/ .
14. IEEE Std. 610.12-1990 (1990). IEEE standard glossary of software engineering terminology
(p. 1).
15. IEEE Std. 730-1998. IEEE standard for software quality assurance plans. http://standards.
ieee.org/ .
16. IEEE Std. 1012-1998. IEEE standard for software verification and validation. http://

standards.ieee.org/ .