Artifact GuideGLOBALFIPS 140-3

FIPS 140-3 Applicability Test

A test for deciding whether a cryptographic module, use case, or procurement claim should be handled as FIPS 140-3 work.

Use it to separate federal-agency applicability, voluntary commercial adoption, module validation scope, and unsupported product-level claims.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 31, 2026
Sections
7

Structured answer sets in this page tree.

Primary sources
18

Cited legal and guidance references.

Publication metadata
Sorena AI
Published May 9, 2026
Updated Jul 31, 2026
Overview

Use this test in order: identify the federal, contractual, procurement, or voluntary-adoption trigger; name the and boundary; then verify that the deployed version, operational environment, approved services, , and live record match. A positive result means a FIPS 140-3 module claim needs validation evidence. It does not establish that the surrounding product, integration, protocol, or system is secure.

Section 1

FIPS 140-3 applies first to federal agency cryptographic module use

Federal agency use is the direct applicability trigger in FIPS 140-3. The standard applies to federal agencies that use cryptography-based security systems to protect sensitive information and to cryptographic modules operated by federal departments and agencies or for them under contract.

For private or commercial organizations, the standard is available for adoption, but that does not make it a universal legal requirement. Treat commercial use as applicable when a customer requirement, procurement clause, contract, internal assurance policy, or market claim calls for FIPS 140-3 validated cryptography. The is jointly operated by NIST and the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, and the FIPS publication states that validated modules are accepted by U.S. and Canadian federal agencies for their respective sensitive-information uses.

Assign the decision to the actor who controls the requirement. The agency or buyer states whether validated cryptography is required; the product or module vendor identifies the implementation and supplies its evidence; an accredited tests a module submitted for validation; reviews the submission and issues the public validation record; and the buyer or operator checks that the procured version and deployment match that record and its .

  • Mark applicable when the module will protect federal agency sensitive information or will be operated for a federal agency under contract.
  • Mark potentially applicable when a commercial customer or internal policy requires a FIPS 140-3 validated module.
  • Mark not established when the only evidence is a general desire for strong cryptography without a module, procurement, or assurance trigger.
  • Keep classified-use substitutions separate: FIPS 140-3 allows cryptographic modules approved for classified use to be used instead of modules validated against the standard.
  • Reassess when the agency or contract requirement changes, the product switches modules, the module version or boundary changes, or the public record moves from Active to Historical or Revoked.
Section 2

Test whether the claim is about a cryptographic module

FIPS 140-3 is not a whole-product security label. It covers cryptographic modules, including hardware, software, firmware, or combinations of those implementations. The applicability test should therefore identify the module boundary before discussing certificates, algorithms, or customer claims.

If the claim names a product, cloud service, appliance, library, or platform, identify the module that provides the cryptographic services. Without an identifiable module boundary, record an unresolved scope claim and request boundary evidence instead of describing the product as "FIPS 140-3 compliant."

  • Record the module name, version, type, cryptographic boundary, operational environment, and the product or service that embeds or calls it.
  • List the services the module provides, such as encryption, authentication, digital signature, and key management.
  • Separate module validation scope from product, protocol, deployment, and organizational security claims.
  • Reject evidence that cites a different module, version, operational environment, or boundary unless the validation documentation supports that relationship.
Section 3

Check the security level and service fit

After the module boundary is clear, decide whether the claimed FIPS 140-3 security level fits the application and environment. FIPS 140-3 provides four qualitative security levels. The selected level has to be appropriate for how the module will be used and for the services it provides, not simply copied from a nearby certificate.

Also check whether the module uses approved security functions for the services being claimed. A module can contain code paths or algorithms that are not part of an approved service, so the applicability record should identify which services are in the approved mode and which are not claimed for FIPS 140-3 purposes.

  • Record the claimed overall security level and any requirement-area levels relevant to the use case.
  • Tie the level choice to the application, environment, and services being protected.
  • List approved security functions and the service or mode that uses each one.
  • Do not treat non-approved algorithms, protocol support, or helper functions as covered by FIPS 140-3 unless the and guidance support the claim.
Section 4

Apply the test to common product and deployment patterns

The same validation record can support different products only when each deployment stays within the module identity, boundary, version, operational-environment, service, and caveat conditions stated by . Start with the actual deployment rather than the supplier's product category.

For every pattern, the buyer names the required protection and checks the public record; the product vendor maps its build and configuration to the validated module; the module vendor and own validation or revalidation evidence; and the operator keeps the approved-mode and environment settings in force. A change to any of those facts reopens the decision.

  • Cryptographic library in an application: identify the exact library build and the process, operating system, processor, and calling application conditions. Do not extend the module claim to application logic, transport protocols, data handling, or an unlisted build.
  • or key-management appliance: match the device model, hardware and firmware versions, physical boundary, roles, interfaces, and enabled services. Treat the appliance console, cluster manager, backup process, and surrounding network as outside the module unless the includes them.
  • Cloud service using a validated module: obtain the provider's module-to-service mapping, certificate number, environment statement, tenant configuration, approved-mode instructions, and status-monitoring process. A cloud marketing claim alone does not show that the customer's selected region, service tier, key path, or operation invokes the validated module.
  • Mobile deployment: verify the validated software or firmware module, supported device and operating-system environment, approved-mode initialization, and whether hardware-backed key storage is inside or outside its boundary. A mobile app that calls a validated module is not itself validated unless it is the defined module.
  • Embedded device or connected product: distinguish the product firmware from an embedded or bound module, record the processor and operational environment, and check how boot, update, entropy, key storage, and service calls cross the boundary. Reassess after a board, processor, operating-system, firmware, or module update.
  • Supplier-built module awaiting validation: do not present a laboratory engagement, test report, implementation-under-test entry, or algorithm certificate as a completed validation. Record the release dependency, responsible vendor and laboratory, expected evidence, and the procurement decision if validation is not complete.
Section 5

Verify validation evidence before using the claim

A FIPS 140-3 applicability decision is only useful if it points to validation evidence that matches the module and use case. FIPS 140-3 says cryptographic modules validated under the are considered conforming to the standard. CMVP guidance also explains that algorithm validation certificates identify the implementation and tested operational environment.

For procurement and customer assurance, the evidence should identify the certificate, module name and version, tested operational environment, any separately identified vendor-affirmed environment, , relevant certificates, and certificate caveats. The CMVP Historical list should not be used for a new procurement decision. Historical is not the same as Revoked: an agency may document a risk decision for continued use of a Historical module, while a Revoked validation may not be cited to show FIPS 140 conformity.

  • Check that the certificate names the same module, version, and operational environment used by the product or service.
  • Check that each certificate supports the algorithm implementation used by the module service.
  • Copy certificate caveats into the applicability record when entropy, operational environment, or service restrictions affect the claim.
  • Record the status-check date and the certificate's sunset date. A standard FIPS 140-3 validation is normally Active for five years, while an Interim Validation has a two-year sunset; programmatic transitions or dependency status can move a record earlier.
  • Avoid procurement statements that rely only on Historical certificates, unrelated algorithm certificates, or certificates for a different module boundary.
Section 6

Applicability record fields

Use the fields below to turn the applicability test into an evidence record, supplier questionnaire, or procurement note. The record should show why FIPS 140-3 applies, what module is in scope, which evidence supports the claim, and which limits remain.

Recommended fields: use-case trigger; customer or agency requirement; product or service name; name and version; module type; boundary summary; operational environment; claimed security level; certificate number and status; location; relevant certificate numbers; approved services; non-approved or not-claimed functions; certificate caveats; procurement decision; unresolved questions.

  • Use "applicable" only when a federal-agency, contract, procurement, or voluntary adoption trigger is tied to a specific .
  • Use "not applicable to this claim" when the request is not about a or no FIPS 140-3 trigger exists; do not use that result to conclude that no other cryptography or procurement requirement applies.
  • Use "needs evidence" when the trigger exists but the module boundary, certificate scope, operational environment, or evidence is missing.
  • Use "do not claim" when the only available evidence is an algorithm certificate, marketing statement, Historical certificate offered for new procurement, Revoked validation, or different module validation.
  • Name the owner and next action for every non-final result: buyer clarifies the requirement, vendor supplies the module mapping, engineering confirms the deployed build and environment, or the vendor and assess validation or revalidation.
Section 7

Red flags that make the applicability answer unreliable

A weak applicability answer usually overstates what FIPS 140-3 validates. The standard and program focus on cryptographic modules and their tested evidence. They do not make every product, deployment, protocol, or organization automatically compliant.

Stop and collect more evidence when the claim cannot identify the module boundary, when the certificate does not match the deployed version or environment, when a historical certificate is being used for procurement, or when a non-approved function is being described as an approved FIPS 140-3 service.

  • A product says "FIPS compliant" but names no -validated module.
  • A supplier provides only a algorithm certificate and no module validation evidence.
  • The deployed operating environment is broader or different from the tested environment on the certificate.
  • The claim ignores caveats about entropy, approved services, operational environment, or non-approved functions.
  • The evidence uses a historical certificate as procurement support instead of reference material.
Primary sources

References and citations

csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Supports recording module boundary, operational environment, certificate caveats, CAVP references, and Security Policy evidence when applying FIPS 140-3 guidance.
"Security Policy"
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Grounds boundary-sensitive treatment for modules that bind to or embed another validated module, including the need to distinguish the module under test from the embedded validated module.
"module boundary"
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Explains that CAVP and CMVP certificates state implementation or module name, version, and tested operational environment.
"name and version number"
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Sections 4.7, 7.1.2.1, and 7.9 support the Active, Historical, Revoked, Interim Validation, and vendor-affirmed operational-environment distinctions used in the evidence branch.
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Public search page for checking algorithm certificate identity before citing CAVP evidence in an applicability record.
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Explains the vendor, CST laboratory, CMVP, and user roles and the federal rule that required cryptographic protection must use validated cryptography.
nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Official CMVP page referenced by FIPS 140-3 for program information about cryptographic module validation.
"CMVP"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Primary source for FIPS 140-3 applicability, applications, module implementation types, approved security functions, CMVP conformance, and procurement caution about historical certificates.
"This standard is applicable to all Federal agencies"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Supports applying the standard to hardware, software, firmware, and hybrid cryptographic modules while selecting requirements for the module's application, environment, and services.
"hardware components or modules, software/firmware programs"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Grounds the core applicability rule for federal agencies, contracted agency operation, classified-use substitutions, and voluntary private or commercial adoption.
"shall be used in designing and implementing cryptographic modules"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Grounds the four-level model, the need to choose a security level appropriate to the module's application, environment, and services, and the requirement to use approved security functions.
"chosen to provide a level of security appropriate"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Supports the record fields for applicability trigger, module implementation type, security level, and approved security functions.
"cryptographic module"
doi.org
Referenced sections
  • Supports focusing the applicability test on hardware, software, firmware, or hybrid cryptographic module implementations and identifies the services and environments that affect applicability and security-level selection.
"hardware components or modules, software/firmware programs"
Related guides

Explore more topics

FIPS 140-3 algorithm certificate mapping: ACVTS certificates to module boundary
Map CAVP algorithm certificates to FIPS 140-3 module services, approved security functions, security policy tables, and validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3 Algorithm Certificates FAQ
How CAVP algorithm certificates support, but do not replace, FIPS 140-3 cryptographic module validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3 Approved and Non-Approved Mode Workflow
Classify FIPS 140-3 module services by approved security service, allowed no-security-claimed use, and non-approved service evidence.
FIPS 140-3 approved-mode evidence workflow
Collect FIPS 140-3 approved-mode evidence for a specific module service: boundary, indicator, selected CAVP capabilities, Security Policy entry, and deployment configuration.
FIPS 140-3 Certificate Maintenance FAQ
How to maintain FIPS 140-3 certificate evidence after validation by checking module status, version, caveats, Security Policy, and revalidation records.
FIPS 140-3 Change Impact Review
Review FIPS 140-3 module changes against boundary, version, operational environment, embedded module, software loading, CVE, and certificate evidence.
FIPS 140-3 CMVP Lifecycle and Status Guide
Follow a FIPS 140-3 module from scoping and CST-laboratory testing through CMVP review, publication, Active status, revalidation, and procurement checks.
FIPS 140-3 compliance guide
An official source FIPS 140-3 compliance guide for cryptographic module scope, security-level claims, CMVP validation evidence, and procurement review.
FIPS 140-3 Entropy and DRBG Evidence
FIPS 140-3 entropy and DRBG guidance for module boundary decisions, entropy caveats, Security Policy evidence, ESV references, and DRBG CSP handling.
FIPS 140-3 Entropy Evidence FAQ
How FIPS 140-3 entropy evidence should document entropy source location, GetEntropy access, SP 800-90B testing, Security Policy text, and certificate caveats.
FIPS 140-3 FAQ for Cryptographic Modules
Answers to common FIPS 140-3 questions about scope, CMVP validation, algorithm certificates, module boundaries, approved mode, and validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3 Module Boundaries FAQ
Understand how FIPS 140-3 module boundaries affect cryptographic module scope, interfaces, software and firmware components, and bound or embedded validated modules.
FIPS 140-3 Module Boundary Selector Workflow
A FIPS 140-3 workflow for selecting a cryptographic module boundary, separating embedded and bound modules, and collecting CMVP validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3 operational environments FAQ
Learn what a FIPS 140-3 operational environment means for software, firmware, and hybrid cryptographic modules, and what evidence to check before relying on a validation claim.
FIPS 140-3 security levels: how to choose and evidence them
A practical FAQ on FIPS 140-3 security levels, module scope, CMVP evidence, bound or embedded modules, and common claim mistakes.
FIPS 140-3 Security Policy Template
Draft the vendor-authored parts of a FIPS 140-3 CMVP Security Policy and prepare the structured module information that CMVP merges into the final policy.
FIPS 140-3 Validation Checklist
Checklist for preparing a cryptographic module for FIPS 140-3 validation: boundary, levels, services, approved algorithms, entropy, tests, security policy, and change evidence.
FIPS 140-3 Validation Maintenance
Decide whether a changed FIPS 140-3 module still matches its validation or needs a CMVP revalidation scenario, evidence update, or paused claim.
FIPS 140-3 Validation Maintenance Change Workflow
Triage a changed FIPS 140-3 module against current CMVP revalidation scenarios, Security Policy evidence, CAVP testing, operational environments, and CVE handling.
FIPS 140-3 Vendor Affirmation FAQ
When vendor affirmation can support a FIPS 140-3 module claim, what it does not supersede, and which Security Policy, CAVP, CSTL, and test-report evidence to keep.
FIPS 140-3 vs ISO/IEC 19790 and ISO/IEC 24759
Compare FIPS 140-3 with ISO/IEC 19790 and ISO/IEC 24759 for cryptographic module validation scope, evidence, testing, and procurement claims.
FIPS 140-3: FIPS 140-2 vs FIPS 140-3
Compare FIPS 140-2 legacy references with FIPS 140-3 requirements, ISO/IEC 19790 alignment, CMVP testing evidence, and guidance mappings.
FIPS 140-3: Module Boundary and Service Mapping
Map a FIPS 140-3 cryptographic module boundary to services, approved algorithms, operational environments, and CMVP validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3: Module Boundary Selector
Select and document a FIPS 140-3 cryptographic module boundary across hardware, software, firmware, operational environment, services, and validation evidence.
FIPS 140-3: Operational Environment
FIPS 140-3 operational environment guidance for software, firmware, hybrid, CAVP certificate, EVM, and PAA/PAI validation claims.
FIPS 140-3: Security Levels Explained
Compare FIPS 140-3 Security Levels 1 through 4 by requirement area and document a level claim without extending it beyond the validated module.
FIPS 140-3: step-by-step workflow for mapping algorithm certificates to CMVP modules
Map CAVP algorithm certificates to a FIPS 140-3 module by matching the tested implementation, operational environment, service use, and CMVP Security Policy record.
How should teams handle approved mode under FIPS 140-3?
Answer the FIPS 140-3 approved-mode question with service-level indicators, Security Policy evidence, and limits on non-approved functions.