Editorial: Caption and number all tables (75e0bd5d) · Commits · STAN4CRA / EN 304 620 Virtual Private Networks Part 1

EN-304-620.md

+10 −6

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -232,6 +232,8 @@ There are no symbols requiring definition used in the present document.

		For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:

		Table 3.3: Abbreviations

		\| Abbreviation \| \|
		\|--------------\|-------------------------------------------\|
		\| CRA \| Cyber Resilience Act \|
		@@ -610,9 +612,7 @@ The purpose of cybersecurity is to protect the product assets, which include pro

		### B.1.1 Data assets

		<span id="tab_BDA"></span>

		Table { seq tab }: VPN product data assets
		Table B.1.1: VPN product data assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|---------------------------------------\|---------------------------------------\|--------\|
		@@ -630,9 +630,7 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product data assets

		What follows is a basic overview of VPN functions. See [clause 4.2](#product-architecture) for a detailed overview of the functions of a VPN product.

		<span id="tab_BPF"></span>

		Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions
		Table B.1.2: VPN product functions

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|------------------------------------------------\|-------------------------------\|--------\|
		@@ -644,6 +642,8 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions

		### B.1.3 Digital assets

		Table B.1.3: VPN digital assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|---------------------------\|----------------------------------------------\|--------------\|
		\| VPN server applications \| Everything \| Astronomical \|
		@@ -651,6 +651,8 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions

		### B.1.4 Human-associated assets

		Table B.1.4: VPN human-associated assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|----------------\|------------------------------\|--------\|
		\| Credentials \| Authorization/access control \| High \|
		@@ -1996,6 +1998,8 @@ For each risk untreated by the product itself in any applicable use case, a corr

		## B.9 All use cases and requirements

		Table B.9: Requirement to use case mapping

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SSD-01 \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \|

clauses/5.Requirements.md

+30 −2

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ This requirement does not apply to UC-6 because by definition that use case does

		### 5.2.5 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.2.5: Appropriate level of cybersecurity requirements mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SSD-01 \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \|
		@@ -138,6 +140,8 @@ From a practical standpoint, a known exploitable vulnerability is a flaw that ha

		### 5.3.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.3.3: Known exploitable vulnerabilities mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-KEV-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -170,6 +174,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products in the indicated use cases wh

		### 5.4.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.4.3: Secure by default mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SBD-01 \| x \| x \| x \| \| x \| x \| \|
		@@ -463,6 +469,8 @@ The product shall reject Repository Metadata if its version number is equal to o

		### 5.5.16 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.5.16: Security updates mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SU-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -644,6 +652,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products within the indicated use case

		### 5.6.10 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.6.10: Authentication and access control mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-AAC-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -954,6 +964,8 @@ The product shall inform the user of the limitations of any privacy protection.

		### 5.7.17 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.7.17: Confidentiality mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-CON-01 \| \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1065,6 +1077,8 @@ The product shall provide a method to implement data validity checks on all inco

		### 5.8.7 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.8.7: Integrity protection mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-INT-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1167,6 +1181,8 @@ The VPN shall not store any Personal Data of the user on the VPN server, gateway

		### 5.9.7 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.9.6: Data minimisation mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-DM-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1253,6 +1269,8 @@ The product shall rate limit traffic from unauthenticated endpoints to nodes.

		### 5.10.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.10.6: Availability protection mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-AP-01 \| x⁸ \| x⁸ \| x⁹ \| x⁸ \| x⁹ \| x⁹ \| x⁸ \|
		@@ -1307,6 +1325,8 @@ Denial of service attacks over the network often use traffic reflection or ampli

		### 5.11.4 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.11.4: Non-interference mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-IM-01 \| \| x \| x \| \| \| \| \|
		@@ -1342,6 +1362,8 @@ The VPN product should be able to operate without a wide set of permissions—eg

		### 5.12.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.12.3: Attack surface minimization mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-MAS-01 \| \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1404,6 +1426,8 @@ The VPN client shall not require routing of traffic from sources/destinations ot

		### 5.13.5 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.13.5: Exploit mitigation mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-EMM-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1517,6 +1541,8 @@ Logging output is expected to take care to not accidentally include a secret as

		### 5.14.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.14.6: Monitoring mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-LOG-01 \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \|
		@@ -1614,6 +1640,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products within the indicated use case

		### 5.15.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.15.6: Factory reset mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-DRT-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|

clauses/K.Cryptography.md

+3 −3

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -179,9 +179,9 @@ Where the product’s default configuration uses ACM-extended cryptographic mech

		### K.3.2 List of ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms

		Table K.1 lists the ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms specified by the present document.
		Table K.3.2 lists the ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms specified by the present document.

		Table K.1: ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms
		Table K.3.2: ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms

		\| ACM-extended cryptographic mechanism \| Type of cryptographic mechanism \| Characteristics / parameters \| Related product function(s) / use case(s), where applicable \| Cryptographic properties \| Specification / reference \| Conditions or limitations, where applicable \|
		\|:-------------------------------------\|:--------------------------------\|:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|:------------------------------------------------------------\|:---------------------------------------------------\|:------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|:--------------------------------------------\|
		@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ Table K.1 lists the ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms specified by the prese
		\| Blake3 \| Algorithm \| \| Key derivation, Generic hashing, MAC \| Authentication, integrity \| BLAKE3 [\[12\]](#_ref_12), [C2SP](https://github.com/C2SP/C2SP) \| \|
		\| UMAC \| Algorithm \| 128 bit \| MAC \| Authentication, Integrity \| RFC 4418 [\[11\]](#_ref_11) \| \|

		> NOTE 1: The combination of the mechanism mentioned in Table K.1: ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms together with the mechanisms in ACM that is appropriate for the cryptographic use-case to form a cryptographic protocol are allowed. For example ChaCha20-Poly1305, HMAC-blake2s or X25519ML-KEM768.
		> NOTE 1: The combination of the mechanism mentioned in Table K.3.2: ACM-extended cryptographic mechanisms together with the mechanisms in ACM that is appropriate for the cryptographic use-case to form a cryptographic protocol are allowed. For example ChaCha20-Poly1305, HMAC-blake2s or X25519ML-KEM768.

		> NOTE 2: The use-case defined in K.3.2 marked in “Related product function(s) / use case(s), where applicable” is a non-exhaustive list and listed algorithm can be used for other appropriate use-cases as well.

clauses/R.RDPS.md

+5 −5

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ The threat model considers the following assets:

		For the purposes of DA-RDPS-001, Table R.1 identifies potential categories of RDPS interaction content and indicates the security properties to be considered for each category when determining the applicable Annex R requirement families.

		Table R.1: Security properties for DA-RDPS-001
		Table R.1: Security properties for DA-RDPS-001

		\| Content type \| Data authenticity \| Integrity \| Confidentiality \|
		\|:--------------------------------------------\|:-----------------:\|:---------:\|:---------------:\|
		@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ Table R.1: Security properties for DA-RDPS-001

		For the purposes of DA-RDPS-002, Table R.2 identifies the security property relevant to the RDPS-dependent product function.

		Table R.2: Security property for DA-RDPS-002
		Table R.2: Security property for DA-RDPS-002

		\| Content type \| Availability \|
		\|:--------------------------------\|:------------:\|
		@@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ The local product side or the RDPS side is unable to send, receive, or process i

		### R.3.4 Assets to Threats mapping

		Table R.3: Assets to Threats mapping
		Table R.3: Assets to Threats mapping

		\| Threat ID \| Threat title \| Related asset(s) \|
		\|:----------\|:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|:-----------------\|
		@@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ The RDPS side shall detect unavailability of the local product side or unaccepta

		### R.4.4 Threats ↔ Requirements mapping

		Table R.4: Threats ↔ Requirements mapping
		Table R.4: Threats ↔ Requirements mapping

		\| Threat ID \| Requirement(s) – Local product side \| Requirement(s) – RDPS side \|
		\|-----------\|-------------------------------------\|----------------------------\|
		@@ -563,7 +563,7 @@ Fail:

		The table below identifies the CRA Annex I Part I requirements that are directly relevant to the RDPS boundary and maps each to the corresponding Annex R requirements. The purpose of this mapping is to support manufacturer traceability and to identify directly relevant CRA requirements that are not yet fully covered by the current Annex R draft. Requirements not covered by Annex R remain addressed by the core part of the standard, insofar as those requirements apply to the product as a whole.

		Table R.5: CRA Annex I Part I ↔ Annex R requirements mapping
		Table R.5: CRA Annex I Part I ↔ Annex R requirements mapping

		\| CRA Annex \| CRA text (summary) \| Annex R mapping \| Rationale / gap observation \|
		\|------------------\|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\|

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -232,6 +232,8 @@ There are no symbols requiring definition used in the present document.

		For the purposes of the present document, the following abbreviations apply:

		Table 3.3: Abbreviations

		\| Abbreviation \| \|
		\|--------------\|-------------------------------------------\|
		\| CRA \| Cyber Resilience Act \|
		@@ -610,9 +612,7 @@ The purpose of cybersecurity is to protect the product assets, which include pro

		### B.1.1 Data assets

		<span id="tab_BDA"></span>

		Table { seq tab }: VPN product data assets
		Table B.1.1: VPN product data assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|---------------------------------------\|---------------------------------------\|--------\|
		@@ -630,9 +630,7 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product data assets

		What follows is a basic overview of VPN functions. See [clause 4.2](#product-architecture) for a detailed overview of the functions of a VPN product.

		<span id="tab_BPF"></span>

		Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions
		Table B.1.2: VPN product functions

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|------------------------------------------------\|-------------------------------\|--------\|
		@@ -644,6 +642,8 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions

		### B.1.3 Digital assets

		Table B.1.3: VPN digital assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|---------------------------\|----------------------------------------------\|--------------\|
		\| VPN server applications \| Everything \| Astronomical \|
		@@ -651,6 +651,8 @@ Table { seq tab }: VPN product functions

		### B.1.4 Human-associated assets

		Table B.1.4: VPN human-associated assets

		\| Asset \| Compromise impacts \| Value \|
		\|----------------\|------------------------------\|--------\|
		\| Credentials \| Authorization/access control \| High \|
		@@ -1996,6 +1998,8 @@ For each risk untreated by the product itself in any applicable use case, a corr

		## B.9 All use cases and requirements

		Table B.9: Requirement to use case mapping

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SSD-01 \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \|

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ This requirement does not apply to UC-6 because by definition that use case does

		### 5.2.5 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.2.5: Appropriate level of cybersecurity requirements mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SSD-01 \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \| x¹ \|
		@@ -138,6 +140,8 @@ From a practical standpoint, a known exploitable vulnerability is a flaw that ha

		### 5.3.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.3.3: Known exploitable vulnerabilities mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-KEV-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -170,6 +174,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products in the indicated use cases wh

		### 5.4.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.4.3: Secure by default mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SBD-01 \| x \| x \| x \| \| x \| x \| \|
		@@ -463,6 +469,8 @@ The product shall reject Repository Metadata if its version number is equal to o

		### 5.5.16 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.5.16: Security updates mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-SU-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -644,6 +652,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products within the indicated use case

		### 5.6.10 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.6.10: Authentication and access control mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-AAC-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -954,6 +964,8 @@ The product shall inform the user of the limitations of any privacy protection.

		### 5.7.17 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.7.17: Confidentiality mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-CON-01 \| \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1065,6 +1077,8 @@ The product shall provide a method to implement data validity checks on all inco

		### 5.8.7 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.8.7: Integrity protection mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-INT-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1167,6 +1181,8 @@ The VPN shall not store any Personal Data of the user on the VPN server, gateway

		### 5.9.7 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.9.6: Data minimisation mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-DM-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1253,6 +1269,8 @@ The product shall rate limit traffic from unauthenticated endpoints to nodes.

		### 5.10.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.10.6: Availability protection mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-AP-01 \| x⁸ \| x⁸ \| x⁹ \| x⁸ \| x⁹ \| x⁹ \| x⁸ \|
		@@ -1307,6 +1325,8 @@ Denial of service attacks over the network often use traffic reflection or ampli

		### 5.11.4 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.11.4: Non-interference mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-IM-01 \| \| x \| x \| \| \| \| \|
		@@ -1342,6 +1362,8 @@ The VPN product should be able to operate without a wide set of permissions—eg

		### 5.12.3 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.12.3: Attack surface minimization mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-MAS-01 \| \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1404,6 +1426,8 @@ The VPN client shall not require routing of traffic from sources/destinations ot

		### 5.13.5 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.13.5: Exploit mitigation mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-EMM-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|
		@@ -1517,6 +1541,8 @@ Logging output is expected to take care to not accidentally include a secret as

		### 5.14.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.14.6: Monitoring mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-LOG-01 \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \| x† \|
		@@ -1614,6 +1640,8 @@ This requirement applies to the subset of products within the indicated use case

		### 5.15.6 Mapping of requirements to use cases

		Table 5.15.6: Factory reset mapping to use cases

		\| Requirements \| UC-1 \| UC-2 \| UC-3 \| UC-4 \| UC-5 \| UC-6 \| UC-7 \|
		\|-------------:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|:----:\|
		\| REQ-DRT-01 \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \| x \|