Cybersecurity Verification & Validation (V&V)
IMPORTANT: This topic was last updated July 2025. Although Medcrypt attempts to keep this up-to-date, you should always check the latest FDA guidances and consult with qualified regulatory professionals for your specific situation. This content provides general information about cybersecurity V&V considerations and is not intended as regulatory consulting advice.
Overview
Verification and Validation (V&V) methods are used to ensure that cybersecurity controls in medical devices meet requirements and specifications and that they fulfill their intended security purpose. V&V are critical components of a quality management system and are particularly essential for demonstrating "reasonable assurance of cybersecurity" as emphasized in FDA's 2025 guidance.
V&V fundamentals for cybersecurity
The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) defines V&V thusly:
"Validation: The assurance that a product, service or system meets the needs of the customer and other identified stakeholders. It often involves acceptance and suitability with external customers."
"Verification: The evaluation of whether or not a product, service, or system complies with a regulation, requirement, specification, or imposed condition. This is often an internal process."
Applying V&V to medical device cybersecurity
Cybersecurity validation: Are you building the right security controls for your device?
Do the security controls actually protect against the threats your device will face in clinical environments?
Can healthcare users realistically implement and maintain these security measures?
Do the controls work effectively in the intended healthcare setting without interfering with clinical workflows?
Cybersecurity verification: Are you building the security controls correctly?
Do the implemented security controls meet the technical specifications and requirements?
Have the controls been correctly coded, configured, and integrated?
Do the controls function as designed under various conditions and attack scenarios?
Medical device cybersecurity V&V requirements
FDA regulatory context
Based on current FDA guidance, cybersecurity V&V should typically demonstrate:
Security by design: Controls built into the device architecture
Risk-based approach: V&V depth matching the cybersecurity risk level
Threat model alignment: Testing against identified attack vectors
Clinical context: Security that works in healthcare environments
Key standards and guidelines
Testing standards:
AAMI/UL 2900-1:2017, Clauses 13-19: Security testing requirements
IEC 81001-5-1:2021, Clauses 5.5-5.7: Verification and validation for health software
ISO 14971: Risk management for medical devices (security risk integration)
AAMI TIR 57: Security risk management principles
Cybersecurity verification methods
Security architecture verification
What to verify:
Authentication mechanisms function as specified
Authorization controls properly restrict access
Encryption implementation meets design requirements
Secure communication protocols operate correctly
Security logging captures required events
Methods:
Code reviews - Static analysis of security-critical code
Configuration audits - Verification of security settings and parameters
Interface testing - Security boundary and API validation
Cryptographic validation - Algorithm implementation and key management verification
Security controls testing
What to verify:
Input validation prevents malicious data processing
Access controls enforce intended permissions
Secure update mechanisms function properly
Error handling doesn't leak sensitive information
Security monitoring and alerting work as designed
Methods:
Unit testing - Individual security component verification
Integration testing - Security control interaction validation
Regression testing - Security preservation across software updates
Boundary testing - Security limits and edge case handling
Compliance verification
What to verify:
Implementation meets regulatory requirements (FDA, IEC, etc.)
Security controls align with industry standards
Documentation accurately reflects implemented security
Configuration matches security specifications
Methods:
Requirements traceability - Mapping security requirements to implementation
Audit trails - Documentation of security decisions and implementations
Standards compliance testing - Verification against applicable cybersecurity standards
Gap analysis - Identification of missing or incomplete security controls
Cybersecurity validation methods
Threat-based validation
What to validate:
Device resilience against identified threats
Effectiveness of security controls in real-world attack scenarios
Ability to detect and respond to cybersecurity incidents
Continued operation under attack conditions
Methods:
Penetration testing: Simulated attacks against the device
Vulnerability scanning: Automated identification of potential weaknesses
Red team exercises: Comprehensive adversarial testing
Threat modeling validation: Confirmation that identified threats are properly addressed
Clinical environment validation
What to validate:
Security controls work in typical healthcare settings
Healthcare workers can successfully operate security features
Clinical workflows aren't disrupted by security measures
Interoperability with other medical devices and systems
Methods:
Usability testing: Healthcare user interaction with security controls
Clinical environment simulation: Testing in realistic healthcare scenarios
Interoperability testing: Security in connected healthcare ecosystems
Workflow integration testing: Security alignment with clinical processes
Operational validation
What to validate:
Security controls perform effectively over time
Maintenance and update procedures work in practice
Incident response procedures are effective
Security monitoring provides actionable information
Methods:
Pilot deployments: Limited field testing of security controls
Long-term monitoring: Security effectiveness over extended periods
Incident simulation: Testing of cybersecurity response procedures
Update validation: Security patch and update process testing
Medical device-specific considerations
Patient safety integration
Critical validation areas:
Security controls don't interfere with critical device functions
Emergency access procedures work when security systems fail
Cybersecurity incidents don't compromise patient care
Recovery procedures minimize patient safety impact
Validation methods:
Safety-security interaction testing: Ensuring controls don't create safety hazards
Failure mode analysis: Understanding patient safety implications of security failures
Emergency scenario testing: Security behavior during clinical emergencies
Recovery time validation: Ensuring acceptable restoration of device functionality
Healthcare Environment Realities
Key validation considerations:
Network constraints: Security controls work with hospital network limitations
User capabilities: Healthcare workers can realistically manage security requirements
Maintenance windows: Security updates fit healthcare operational schedules
Legacy integration: Security works with existing healthcare infrastructure
Regulatory documentation
V&V evidence typically needed:
Test plans and protocols: Documented approach to cybersecurity V&V
Test results and analysis: Evidence of security control effectiveness
Traceability matrices: Links between security requirements, controls, and validation
Risk assessment updates: How V&V results inform cybersecurity risk management
V&V planning and execution
Risk-based approach
High-risk devices (life-sustaining, implantable, critical care):
Comprehensive penetration testing required
Extensive threat modeling validation
Clinical environment testing essential
Independent security assessment recommended
Moderate-risk devices:
Focused security testing on key attack vectors
Standard vulnerability scanning and assessment
Basic clinical workflow validation
Internal security review processes
Lower-risk devices:
Essential security control verification
Automated security scanning
Configuration and compliance checking
Documentation of security design decisions
Validation timing
Development phase:
Security architecture verification
Security control unit testing
Threat model validation
Early penetration testing
Pre-market phase:
Comprehensive security testing
Clinical environment validation
Regulatory submission preparation
Final security assessment
Post-market phase:
Ongoing vulnerability monitoring
Security update validation
Incident response testing
Continuous security assessment
Common V&V challenges and solutions
Challenge: Limited cybersecurity testing expertise
Solutions:
Partner with specialized cybersecurity testing firms
Invest in internal cybersecurity testing capabilities
Leverage industry standards and testing frameworks
Participate in information sharing organizations (like MedISAO)
Challenge: Balancing security and usability
Solutions:
Include healthcare users in security control validation
Test security measures in realistic clinical scenarios
Design security that enhances rather than hinders clinical workflows
Iterative testing and refinement of security controls
Challenge: Keeping up with evolving threats
Solutions:
Regular threat model updates and revalidation
Continuous vulnerability monitoring and assessment
Industry threat intelligence integration
Periodic security testing and assessment updates
Key takeaways
Bottom line: Cybersecurity V&V for medical devices requires specialized approaches that consider patient safety, healthcare environments, and evolving threat landscapes. A systematic, risk-based approach to V&V can help demonstrate regulatory compliance while ensuring security controls actually protect patients and healthcare organizations. Consult with cybersecurity and regulatory experts to develop appropriate V&V strategies for your specific devices and risk profile.
V&V is essential for cybersecurity assurance: Cannot demonstrate "reasonable assurance of cybersecurity" without systematic validation
Medical devices require specialized approaches: Healthcare environment and patient safety considerations demand unique V&V methods
Risk-based scaling: V&V depth and methods should match the cybersecurity risk profile of your device
Continuous process: Cybersecurity V&V extends beyond initial development through entire device lifecycle
Multi-stakeholder involvement: Effective V&V requires collaboration between security, quality, clinical, and regulatory teams
Last updated
Was this helpful?