# Shared responsibility and IL6

Source: https://www.testifysec.com/docs/badger/security/shared-responsibility/

Which parts of each control TestifySec, the customer program, the enclave and the model operator own, and what Badger does and does not mean for an IL6 authorization.

Control alignment, not an authorization or compliance claim. The responsibilities below are a starting point for a program's system security plan and customer responsibility matrix; the authorizing official decides the final allocation.

 

## The parties

 

| Party | Who | Owns |
| --- | --- | --- |
| TestifySec | The Badger code in this repository | What the managed build, gateway, admission verifier, connectors and portal enforce, and the tests that show it |
| Customer program | The build administrator, enclave administrators and portal operators | Build inputs, signing keys, profiles, which connectors and writes are on, operation and review |
| Enclave | The hosting environment | Facility, network boundary, operating systems, identity provider and PKI, storage |
| Model operator | Whoever runs the model and the gateway's provider endpoint | Provider credentials, TLS to the provider, the model's own accreditation |

 

## By control area

 

| Area | TestifySec | Customer program | Enclave | Model operator |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Access control (AC-3, AC-6) | Compiled permissions, refused routes and commands, writes off by default | File permissions on the workspace; whether to enable connector writes | Operating system accounts |  |
| Information flow (AC-4, SC-7) | The process reaches only the gateway; connectors reach one service each | Denying network access to tool commands with a VM, container or host firewall | The enclave boundary |  |
| Markings (AC-16) | Stamping, parsing and comparing markings | Choosing the build's data marking and each connector's marking | Accrediting the system high | Accrediting the model |
| Personnel clearance (PS-3, AC-2) | None: Badger neither stores nor decides a person's clearance | Operating the identity service that asserts it; deciding who is cleared | The identity provider or PKI that carries the assertion |  |
| Identity (IA-2, IA-5) | Portal certificate checks; no credentials in the agent process | Key custody and rotation for the portal and admission trust | Smart cards, the enclave CA, operating system login | Provider credentials |
| Device identity (IA-3) | Planned device-key protocol | Approving devices | TPM or Secure Enclave hardware, device inventory |  |
| Audit (AU-2 to AU-12) | Gateway and portal records, hash chain | Collecting, retaining and reviewing records; the collector's queue and access controls | Operating system audit |  |
| Configuration (CM-2, CM-5, CM-7, CM-14) | Compiled configuration, signed profiles, admission | Who may build, sign and install; the trust input |  |  |
| Cryptography (SC-8, SC-13) | TLS in the portal and connectors; a future FIPS-mode gateway | Choosing approved modules with the authorizing official | Network encryption required for the data's classification | TLS to the provider |
| Data at rest (SC-28) | Owner-only file modes | Retention | Disk and storage encryption |  |
| Output filtering (SI-15) | Best-effort credential redaction | Keeping secrets out of paths the agent can read |  |  |
| Supply chain (SR-3, SR-4, SR-11) | Gated pushes with signed evidence; pinned runner | A deployment-owned signer and roots, and verifying digests on install |  |  |

 

Families with no Badger mechanism (awareness and training, assessment, incident response, media protection, physical protection, personnel security, planning, risk assessment) belong to the customer program and the enclave. The portal's audit log is an input to incident response, not a mechanism for it.

 

## Classification levels and personnel clearance

 

Badger handles classification levels on things: the marking compiled into a deployment, the marking each connector carries, and the marking a model gateway is accredited to. It does not handle people's clearances. Whether a person is cleared, and for what, is decided by an external service (the enclave's identity provider or PKI) and the program that runs it. Badger neither stores a clearance nor decides one; where a Badger component needs to know, it consumes that service's assertion. Assessors should place personnel clearance with the customer program and its identity service, not with Badger.

 

## Where Badger depends on TestifySec

 

- **This repository's push gate** signs its evidence with an identity from the TestifySec platform. A program that builds Badger itself runs its own gate and signer.
 - **The model gateway's production configuration** checks every request against the TestifySec platform. Removing that dependency is what the offline portal and its open contract are for; see [the open API and the platform](https://www.testifysec.com/docs/badger/concepts/platform).

 

## What IL6 means for Badger

 

Impact Level 6 describes a cloud environment's handling of information up to Secret. The Badger workstation application is part of a mission system; it does not acquire an IL6 authorization from its source code. An authorized cloud service also does not authorize this application, or every model service inside it, by being authorized itself.

 

What Badger can contribute to an authorization is evidence: the mechanisms on the [control alignment](https://www.testifysec.com/docs/badger/security/control-alignment) page, the tests that exercise them, and signed records of what was built and pushed. What a program still has to establish, for its own deployment:

 

- the mission sponsor and authorizing official, the system boundary and its categorization;
 - the applicable DoD security requirements guides, STIGs and control baseline, and which controls are inherited;
 - an approved model host and model, the identity and network architecture, and the cryptographic modules (FIPS 140-3 validation is about modules, and is not by itself the protection decision for classified data);
 - the security plan, test evidence, remediation record and continuous monitoring.

 

These are deployment deliverables, not a property of the repository.

Reference generated from the product documentation. Match commands and support details to your installed release.