Validation ChecklistNIST/CMVPFIPS 140-3

FIPS 140-3 Validation checklist

A module-level checklist for preparing FIPS 140-3 validation evidence before CST laboratory testing and CMVP review.

Use it to test whether the module boundary, security level claims, services, algorithms, entropy evidence, self-tests, security policy, and change records are ready for validation review.

Author
Sorena AI
Published
May 9, 2026
Updated
Jul 25, 2026
Sections
6

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

A module is ready to enter validation planning when the vendor can freeze and identify the , draw its cryptographic boundary, choose and justify the target security levels, map every service to its approved or non-approved treatment, and produce consistent and test evidence. Use this checklist before laboratory testing or before relying on a supplier claim. Passing an internal checklist does not produce a CMVP validation.

Section 1

Validation readiness gate

FIPS 140-3 applies to cryptographic modules used by federal agencies or operated for them under contract, and its adoption is also available to private and commercial organizations. CMVP validation is not a broad product certification; it validates the cryptographic module and gives procuring agencies a security metric for equipment containing validated modules.

Start the checklist only after the team can name the , the module type, the cryptographic boundary, and the intended security level claim. If the answer is still the whole product, a cloud service, or a library name without a boundary diagram, the validation package is not ready.

  • Confirm the module is hardware, software, firmware, hybrid, or another defined implementation covered by FIPS 140-3, not an undefined product bundle.
  • Record the federal contract, procurement requirement, customer assurance requirement, or internal policy reason that makes FIPS 140-3 validation relevant.
  • Choose the target security level by application and operating environment, then identify which requirement areas have level-specific obligations and which apply to all modules.
  • Assign the vendor owner, engineering owner, owner, and CST laboratory contact before evidence collection starts; record who can approve module changes while testing is underway.
Section 2

Module boundary and security level checklist

The boundary evidence should let a reviewer separate the validated module from surrounding product code, excluded components, embedded validated modules, and the operational environment. For binding or embedding cases, the implementation guidance expects clear identification of the and any external validated module the submission relies on.

Security level claims should be traceable to the FIPS 140-3 requirement areas, including module specification, interfaces, roles and authentication, software or firmware security, operating environment, physical security, non-invasive security, sensitive security parameter management, self-tests, life-cycle assurance, and mitigation of other attacks.

  • Attach a boundary diagram that labels the module, interfaces, ports, excluded components, and any embedded or bound validated module.
  • List the module version, firmware or software version, hardware platform, operating environment, processor accelerator assumptions, and configuration used for validation testing.
  • For each target security level, map every applicable requirement area to an assertion, expected test evidence, responsible owner, and unresolved gap instead of writing only an overall level claim.
  • If the module relies on an external validated module, record the external module name, CMVP certificate number, version, status, services used, algorithms used, movement, and self-test responsibility.
Section 3

Approved services, algorithms, entropy, and self-tests

FIPS 140-3 conforming modules must employ approved security functions, including approved algorithms, key-management techniques, and authentication techniques. The checklist should therefore tie every service table entry to approved-mode behavior, non-approved functions with no security claimed, or component validation evidence, and the wording that users will follow.

Entropy and self-test evidence should be checked early because they often affect the certificate, the , the test report, and the allowed approved mode. The CMVP implementation guidance covers entropy caveats, DRBG-related evidence, cryptographic algorithm self-tests, periodic self-testing, error logging, and software or firmware loading distinctions.

For generation in approved mode, IG 9.3.A sets a concrete gate: if the known amount of entropy used to generate the SSP is less than 112 bits, the module cannot be validated. When the source is outside the Tested Operational Environment's Physical Perimeter or the module only passively receives entropy, the applicable assurance caveat, minimum-input control, and operator guidance must also be captured; the exact branch depends on how the module obtains the entropy.

  • Build a services table that separates approved services, non-approved services, and non-approved algorithms allowed in approved mode with no security claimed.
  • For each approved service, list the algorithm, mode, key size or parameter set, certificate or CVL reference, operational environment, and approved service indicator.
  • For each entropy source, record the ESV or ENT evidence, physical or non-physical classification, credited entropy claim, DRBG seeding use, health tests, and any CMVP caveat needed on the certificate or .
  • Document pre-operational integrity tests, cryptographic algorithm self-tests, conditional self-tests, periodic self-tests, and error states in a way the CST laboratory can trace to the module behavior.
Section 4

Security policy and submission evidence

The is the public-facing control description that must stay aligned with the tested module. Before submission, compare the security policy, test report inputs, user guidance, crypto officer guidance, service tables, algorithm tables, entropy claims, and operational-environment listings for internal consistency.

FIPS 140-3 validation testing is performed by accredited CST laboratories, and a test report for modules demonstrating compliance is submitted to CMVP for review and validation. The schedule is coordination-dependent, so the checklist should focus on completeness and traceability rather than promising a fixed review duration.

Record the FIPS 140-3, SP 800-140-series, Implementation Guidance, Management Manual, template, and algorithm-transition editions used for the package. CMVP guidance and submission resources change; recheck the official CMVP pages before laboratory testing, submission, revalidation, and any material claim update.

  • Confirm the names the exact module, version, boundary, security levels, operational environments, roles, authentication mechanisms, services, approved algorithms, non-approved functions, handling, self-tests, and mitigation claims.
  • Check that every certificate-facing statement in the matches the validation evidence, including caveats for entropy, operational environment, processor acceleration, embedded modules, or algorithm transitions.
  • Prepare laboratory evidence for module specification, interfaces, roles and services, software or firmware integrity, operating environment, physical and non-invasive security where applicable, management, self-tests, life-cycle assurance, and other-attack mitigation.
  • Do not use the CMVP Historical list for procurement decisions; record active validation status when validation status is part of a procurement or customer assurance review.
Section 5

Change and maintenance checks

A validation checklist is incomplete if it stops at the first certificate. Module changes, excluded component changes, algorithm transitions, operational-environment changes, firmware or software loading changes, and embedded-module status changes can affect whether the validation evidence still matches the module being shipped.

Keep a maintenance record that separates changes requiring laboratory or CMVP review from ordinary engineering records. Unsupported statements such as "FIPS validated product" should be removed unless the shipped configuration matches the module certificate, boundary, version, caveats, and operating environment.

  • Trigger review when the cryptographic boundary, module version, operational environment, approved services, algorithm implementation, entropy source, self-test behavior, or text changes.
  • For excluded components inside the module boundary, treat modifications as validation-impacting until the lab confirms the revalidation path.
  • Re-check external validated module status and approved algorithm status when a submission relies on embedded or bound modules.
  • Keep customer and procurement claims tied to the module certificate and its caveats, not to a broader product name or marketing SKU.
Section 6

Checklist output record

Use the checklist result as a validation-readiness record. Each row should state the verifiable condition, responsible owner, expected evidence, source or assertion reference, result, exception or open question, and whether the issue blocks CST laboratory testing, CMVP submission, procurement reliance, or customer-facing claims.

  • Boundary and configuration: diagram, module name, module version, operational environment, excluded components, embedded or bound modules, and certificate dependencies.
  • Level and requirement map: selected security level by requirement area, evidence file, owner, and unresolved gap.
  • Services and algorithms: approved services, non-approved services, or CVL evidence, approved service indicators, non-approved algorithm handling, and cross-reference.
  • Entropy and self-tests: ESV or ENT evidence, DRBG use, health tests, CASTs, integrity tests, error handling, and caveats.
  • Submission and maintenance: CST laboratory evidence package, CMVP submission assumptions, certificate status checks, change triggers, and public-claim approval.
Primary sources

References and citations

csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Provides program guidance for the evidence rows covering approved service indicators, CAVP certificates, entropy, self-tests, operational environments, and change impact.
csrc.nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Use to confirm algorithm certificate records referenced in the checklist output.
nist.gov
Referenced sections
  • Official CMVP program page referenced by FIPS 140-3 for program information and validation resources.
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 Applicability Test
Check whether FIPS 140-3 applies to a cryptographic module claim by testing agency use, module boundary, security level, approved functions, CMVP status, and procurement 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 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.