Artifact GuideGLOBALETSI EN 303 645

ETSI EN 303 645 How should teams handle constrained devices under ETSI EN 303 645 for consumer IoT products

ETSI EN 303 645 V3.1.3 does not give constrained devices a blanket exemption. Apply each provision and document any use-case resource constraint or inability to update software.

The older V2.1.1 edition defined a constrained-device category. V3.1.3 instead uses provision-specific conditions, so the edition must be named in any assessment claim.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 25, 2026
Questions
3

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
4

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated Jul 25, 2026
Overview

Under ETSI EN 303 645 V3.1.3, do not mark a product "constrained" and stop. The current edition removed the earlier constrained-device definition. Apply every provision to the actual product and record the specific , absent feature, or inability to update software that changes a provision's result.

Search this module

Find a question or answer quickly

3 of 3 questions
Question 1

How should teams handle constrained devices under ETSI EN 303 645 for consumer IoT products?

Start with the edition. EN 303 645 V2.1.1 defined a constrained device through physical limits in processing, communication, storage, or user interaction. EN 303 645 V3.1.3 no longer defines or uses that category as a general applicability shortcut.

The current edition still recognizes resource limits where a provision says they matter. For example, provision 5.1-5 requires protection that makes successful brute-force attacks through network interfaces impracticable unless a resource constraint determined by the use case prevents implementation. Update provisions 5.3-14, 5.3-15A, and 5.3-15B apply to devices that cannot have their software updated, whether or not a team calls them constrained.

  • Name the exact resource constraint, the use case that creates it, and the provision it affects.
  • Separate an absent feature, an unsatisfied condition, a recommendation not fulfilled, and an implemented control; they lead to different entries.
  • Do not carry a V2.1.1 constrained-device rationale into a V3.1.3 assessment without rechecking the current provision and status.
  • Reassess the decision when the use case, hardware resources, firmware architecture, update path, connected hub or service, or cited ETSI edition changes.
Citations
Question 2

When can constrained-device status change an ETSI EN 303 645 answer?

A resource constraint changes an answer only where the current provision or condition makes that fact relevant. Provision 5.0-1 separately requires a justification for each recommendation considered not applicable or not fulfilled; it does not authorize a blanket exception from mandatory requirements.

For updates, distinguish three questions. Provision 5.3-2 requires a secure update mechanism unless a resource constraint determined by the use case prevents implementation. Provision 5.3-13 requires every manufacturer to publish the defined security-update support period. If a device cannot have its software updated, provision 5.3-14 recommends publishing the reason and hardware-replacement support period and method, while 5.3-15A and 5.3-15B recommend that the device be isolable and its hardware replaceable.

  • Do not mark a provision N/A merely because the product is small, battery-powered, low-cost, or built on a limited chipset.
  • For authentication, document the only if it prevents the provision 5.1-5 brute-force control; the other applicable password and authentication requirements remain.
  • For updates, separate an implemented update mechanism, an individual non-updateable component, and a device that cannot have any software updated.
Citations
Question 3

What evidence should teams keep for constrained devices?

Keep the evidence close to the and process used by ETSI TS 103 701. The supplier organization identifies the Device Under Test, completes the ICS, provides necessary IXIT information for provisions claimed as supported, and gives enough information for the test laboratory to check consistency and soundness.

For each resource-constraint or non-updateable-device decision, the evidence should answer four questions: what product fact changes the provision, which condition or feature applies, what support value and detail are recorded, and what public disclosure or replacement procedure is required.

Use a provision-by-provision sequence: test the condition or feature first; record Y, N, or N/A with its rationale; provide the required detail for claims of support; then check whether a public support-period, no-update rationale, replacement method, isolation procedure, or hardware-replacement procedure is also expected.

  • Document the DUT, model designation, software version assessed, interfaces, associated-service dependencies, and the being relied on.
  • Use the detail field to explain implemented measures, reasons implementation is not possible or appropriate, or the rationale for a true N/A determination.
  • When the device cannot have software updated, retain the published rationale, defined support period, hardware-replacement support period and method, and the isolation and replacement procedures.
Citations
Primary sources

References and citations

etsi.org
Referenced sections
  • Grounds the ICS support and detail structure and the disclosure and replacement recommendations for devices that cannot have software updated.
"the entry in the detail column is to contain the rationale"
etsi.org
Referenced sections
  • Current source for recommendation justifications, provision 5.1-5's resource-constraint exception, support-period publication, and provisions for devices that cannot have software updated.
"For devices that cannot have their software updated"
etsi.org
Referenced sections
  • Current baseline source for device-dependent applicability, provision 5.0-1 justifications, the use-case resource constraint in provision 5.1-5, and provisions for devices that cannot have software updated.
"resource constraint determined by the use case"
Related guides

Explore more topics

ETSI EN 303 645 Applicability and Scope
Decide whether a connected product is in scope of ETSI EN 303 645, define the consumer IoT evidence boundary, and document N/A justifications for assessment.
ETSI EN 303 645 compliance: ICS, IXIT, evidence
Plan ETSI EN 303 645 compliance evidence for consumer IoT products with scope, ICS, IXIT, TS 103 701 assessment steps, verdict risks, and cited controls.
ETSI EN 303 645 consumer IoT products: what is in scope?
Decide whether a device and its associated services are in scope of ETSI EN 303 645 V3.1.3 and document the DUT, ICS, IXIT, and assessment boundary.
ETSI EN 303 645 Current Version Tracker
Track ETSI EN 303 645 version evidence, ETSI deliverable status checks, TS 103 701 assessment alignment, and change triggers for consumer IoT security work.
ETSI EN 303 645 CVD Workflow for IoT Vulnerability Reports
Cited workflow for ETSI EN 303 645 vulnerability disclosure: public policy contents, reporting contact, acknowledgement and status timelines, timely action, and TS 103 701 evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 Data Protection Provisions
Guide to ETSI EN 303 645 data protection provisions for consumer IoT, including security, consent, telemetry, deletion, minimization, aggregation, and anonymization.
ETSI EN 303 645 default passwords: what must consumer IoT teams do?
ETSI EN 303 645 default password guidance for consumer IoT: unique or user-defined passwords, pre-installed password generation, change mechanisms, brute-force controls, and TS 103 701 evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 FAQ: Consumer IoT Security Questions
Practical answers to common ETSI EN 303 645 questions on consumer IoT scope, associated services, passwords, updates, vulnerability disclosure, telemetry, deletion, and assessment evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 ICS and IXIT Evidence Template
Build a cited ICS and IXIT evidence template for ETSI EN 303 645 consumer IoT assessments, with clear separation between EN provisions and TS 103 701 test information.
ETSI EN 303 645 implementation checklist
This ETSI EN 303 645 implementation checklist helps scope a consumer IoT product, record Annex B support statuses, map IXIT evidence, and avoid weak conformance claims.
ETSI EN 303 645 Implementation Evidence Guide
Build ETSI EN 303 645 implementation evidence from Annex B support/detail records, TS 103 701 ICS and IXIT inputs, test verdicts, and scoped external evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 IoT Applicability Workflow
Decide whether ETSI EN 303 645 applies to a consumer IoT product, what associated services belong in scope, and how to record justified non-applicability.
ETSI EN 303 645 personal data deletion FAQ for consumer IoT
What ETSI EN 303 645 says about deleting user data and personal data from consumer IoT devices, associated services, apps, and evidence records.
ETSI EN 303 645 requirements: consumer IoT provision map
Map ETSI EN 303 645 consumer IoT requirements to product scope, Annex B ICS entries, TS 103 701 evidence, and implementation owners.
ETSI EN 303 645 Secure Update Evidence Workflow
Build secure-update evidence for ETSI EN 303 645 using provision 5.3, Annex B support/detail records, and TS 103 701 ICS, IXIT, and test-plan inputs.
ETSI EN 303 645 Secure Update Workflow
Map ETSI EN 303 645 secure-update provisions into a practical workflow for consumer IoT update mechanisms, support-period disclosures, and TS 103 701 evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 Secure Updates and Vulnerability Disclosure
Source-backed guide to ETSI EN 303 645 clauses 5.2 and 5.3 for consumer IoT vulnerability disclosure, security updates, support periods, and assessment evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 support period: what must consumer IoT teams publish?
ETSI EN 303 645 support-period guidance for consumer IoT: defined security-update support periods, user-accessible publication, non-updateable-device replacement support, model designation, and TS 103 701 evidence.
ETSI EN 303 645 telemetry: what should consumer IoT teams evidence?
ETSI EN 303 645 telemetry guidance for consumer IoT teams: security anomaly examination, IXIT 24-TelData evidence, personal-data minimization, and consumer telemetry disclosures.
ETSI EN 303 645 test evidence: what should consumer IoT teams keep?
ETSI EN 303 645 test evidence guidance for consumer IoT teams: ICS support claims, IXIT detail, TS 103 701 test plans, verdicts, and external evidence checks.
ETSI EN 303 645 vs EU CRA for Consumer IoT
Compare ETSI EN 303 645 consumer IoT evidence with the EU Cyber Resilience Act's scope, manufacturer duties, application dates, and conformity requirements.
ETSI EN 303 645 vs RED Cybersecurity Delegated Act
Compare ETSI EN 303 645 consumer IoT evidence with the RED cybersecurity requirements, EN 18031 standards, application date, and conformity routes.
ETSI EN 303 645 vs UK PSTI: Evidence Crosswalk
Compare ETSI EN 303 645 evidence with UK PSTI scope, three mandatory security requirements, statements of compliance, duties, and enforcement.
ETSI EN 303 645 vulnerability disclosure requirements for consumer IoT
What ETSI EN 303 645 requires for consumer IoT vulnerability disclosure policies, report handling, status updates, timely action, and TS 103 701 evidence.
ETSI TS 103 701 Test Evidence Workflow for EN 303 645
Build an ETSI TS 103 701 test evidence workflow for EN 303 645 consumer IoT assessments: DUT identification, ICS, IXIT, test plans, verdicts, and external evidence.