Test 1-4

TEST 1

Test Case ID: BIS-1.3.1 Test Name: TC_ID_TEST_ON-CHIP_DEBUG_INTERFACE_SECURITY

Objective

To identify the availability of on-chip debugging interfaces such as JTAG or SWD by reviewing the datasheet of the SoC used in the device under test (DUT) and documenting their specifications and security-related characteristics.

Tools Used

  • OEM-provided SoC datasheet

  • Technical reference manual for the SoC

  • OEM hardware documentation for the DUT

Test Execution Steps

  1. Datasheet Review

    • Obtain the SoC datasheet from the OEM and locate the section describing hardware interfaces and pinout details.

  2. Interface Identification

    • Identify the presence of JTAG, SWD, or other on-chip debug interfaces and record their physical pins, signal names, and associated protocols.

  3. Security Feature Documentation

    • Note any security features mentioned in the datasheet, such as debug interface locking, password protection, or fuse-based disabling.

Expected Results for Pass

  • All on-chip debugging interfaces present in the SoC are identified from the datasheet.

  • Security-related characteristics for each interface are documented, including their default state in production and available protection mechanisms.

Test Observations

(Insert findings here — e.g., "Datasheet confirms JTAG interface with 4-wire configuration, default state disabled in production; SWD present with password-protected access.")

Evidence Provided

  • Annotated excerpt from SoC datasheet showing debug interface specifications

  • OEM confirmation letter or documentation of default production state

  • Photographs or diagrams highlighting interface pins on DUT

Test Case Result

☐ Pass – Debug interfaces identified and documented as per datasheet ☐ Fail – Incomplete identification or missing documentation on security features

TEST 2

Test Case ID: BIS-1.3.2 Test Name: TC_VERIFY_TEST_ON-CHIP_DEBUG_INTERFACE_SECURITY

Objective

To verify and validate that the on-chip debug ports/interfaces (e.g., JTAG, SWD) in production devices match the vendor documentation, and that all enabled interfaces are protected with effective access control mechanisms such as complex passwords or hardware locks.

Tools Used

  • OEM-provided documentation listing debug interface configuration in production devices

  • Hardware-based debug tools (e.g., JTAG debugger, SWD programmer)

  • DUT configuration access (CLI, web UI, or firmware)

  • Signal monitoring tools (e.g., oscilloscope, logic analyzer)

Test Execution Steps

  1. Documentation Review

    • Cross-reference the DUT production configuration with OEM documentation to identify which debug interfaces should be enabled or disabled.

  2. Interface Interaction

    • Systematically attempt to connect to each documented debug interface using the appropriate debugging tools and communication protocols.

  3. Access Control Testing

    • For enabled interfaces, test the configured protection mechanisms (e.g., password authentication, secure fuse lock) to verify effectiveness.

  4. Bypass Attempt

    • Attempt controlled bypass tests (in OEM presence) to ensure disabled interfaces cannot be activated or accessed.

  5. Result Documentation

    • Record the methods, tools, and outcomes for each tested interface.

Expected Results for Pass

  • All enabled/disabled debug interface states match the vendor’s documentation.

  • Enabled interfaces are fully protected by strong authentication or hardware access control.

  • Disabled interfaces are inaccessible through direct connection or bypass attempts.

Test Observations

(Insert findings here — e.g., "JTAG disabled as per documentation; SWD enabled with challenge-response authentication; bypass attempts unsuccessful.")

Evidence Provided

  • Photographs of DUT debug connection points

  • Logs from debugger connection attempts

  • OEM documentation excerpts for interface states

  • Test tool output showing access control verification

Test Case Result

☐ Pass – Debug interface states and protections match vendor documentation ☐ Fail – Discrepancy found between documentation and actual DUT configuration

TEST 3

Test Case ID: BIS-1.3.3 Test Name: TC_OEM_TEST_ON-CHIP_DEBUG_INTERFACE_SECURITY

Objective

To verify, in the presence of the OEM team, the enabling/disabling status of all on-chip debug interfaces (e.g., JTAG, SWD) using relevant hardware-based debuggers and to validate that access control mechanisms are in place and effective where interfaces are enabled.

Tools Used

  • OEM-provided hardware-based debug tools (JTAG debugger, SWD programmer)

  • DUT interface documentation

  • Logic analyzer or oscilloscope (for signal detection if needed)

  • OEM-provided secure access credentials or unlock procedures (if applicable)

Execution Steps

  1. OEM Presence Coordination

    • Arrange for the OEM team to attend the testing session to ensure transparency and validation of results.

  2. Pre-Test Briefing

    • Share the test plan and expected outcomes with the OEM team to ensure mutual agreement on the process.

  3. Access to Proprietary Tools

    • Utilize OEM’s proprietary debug tools, knowledge, and procedures where required for comprehensive testing.

  4. Interface Testing

    • For each debug interface (JTAG/SWD), attempt to connect using appropriate hardware-based debuggers.

    • For enabled interfaces, test access control mechanisms such as password authentication or secure fuse lock.

    • For disabled interfaces, confirm no data exchange or control is possible.

  5. Result Documentation

    • Record all activities, including screenshots, photographs, and logs.

    • Ensure OEM representatives witness and confirm the observed states.

Expected Results for Pass

  • OEM-acknowledged report confirming the state (enabled/disabled) of each debug interface.

  • All enabled interfaces have functional and effective access control.

  • Disabled interfaces are inaccessible despite direct hardware connection attempts.

Test Observations

(Insert findings here — e.g., "JTAG detected but locked via OEM-provided authentication; SWD interface fully disabled; OEM team verified results.")

Evidence Provided

  • OEM-signed verification document

  • Screenshots/logs from debugger connection attempts

  • Photographs of physical connection during testing

  • Video evidence (if recorded) of test execution

Test Case Result

☐ Pass – All interfaces validated in OEM presence and matched vendor policy ☐ Fail – Discrepancy found between documented policy and actual interface state

Here’s your TEST 4 – BIS-1.3.4 rewritten in the same professional, consistent, and audit-ready format as the previous three test cases:

TEST 4

Test Case ID: BIS-1.3.4 Test Name: TC_PROCESS_TEST_ON-CHIP_DEBUG_INTERFACE_SECURITY

Description

To conduct a process audit of the manufacturing facility in order to validate the vendor’s claim that all on-chip debugging interfaces (e.g., JTAG, SWD) are closed/disabled or secured during the device provisioning stage.

Tools Used

  • Vendor’s manufacturing/provisioning process flow documentation

  • Block connection diagrams and production test records

  • Process audit checklist (based on vendor’s stated debug interface security policy)

  • Access to manufacturing floor (if on-site audit is conducted)

Execution Steps

  1. Documentation Review

    • Examine the vendor’s process flow documentation for manufacturing and provisioning, focusing on steps where debug interfaces are disabled or secured.

  2. Process Matching

    • Compare each step of the actual manufacturing/provisioning process against the documented process, recording any deviations.

  3. Disablement Verification

    • Confirm that disabling or securing debug interfaces is a standard and consistently applied process before the device leaves the production line.

  4. Evidence Collection

    • Collect copies of production records, screenshots, or photographs confirming debug interface disablement during provisioning.

Expected Results for Pass

  • The debug interface disablement process is documented, implemented, and consistently followed.

  • Vendor documentation matches the actual manufacturing/provisioning practices.

  • All devices leaving the manufacturing facility have debug interfaces disabled or secured according to the vendor’s stated policy.

Test Observations

(Insert findings here — e.g., "Audit confirmed debug interface disablement is performed at the firmware stage; no deviations observed across sampled units.")

Evidence Provided

  • Completed process audit checklist

  • Copies of relevant process flow diagrams

  • Photographs of provisioning steps

  • Vendor-signed verification document

Test Result

☐ Pass – Process audit confirms compliance with vendor’s debug interface security policy ☐ Fail – Discrepancy found between documented process and actual practices

Overall Test Result

(Summarize overall result for BIS-1.3.1 to BIS-1.3.4 — e.g., "All test cases passed; on-chip debug interfaces confirmed disabled or secured in production devices.")

Previous1.3 Test On-Chip Debug Interface SecurityNext1.4 Test Trusted Execution Implementation

Last updated

Was this helpful?