Zerify Inc (ZRFY)

[Gold49er]

Z - You know how to Wake One Up!

After a late night of writing about aspects of the Network Deficiencies to support MFA in the Status Que, and the ongoing in Syria.
I sleep in until Market Open.

As you said an "EYEOPENER"

MY EYES ARE WIDE OPEN !

MFA/OBB may not fall under any IEEE Standards Body but PCI (Security Standards Council) It Might as well be.

And I did note that under SMS which part of the MFA, that Not only does it fall under ANSI Requirements (which ANSI is an International Standards Body under the IEEE) but NIST and ISO too.

Anyone above the grade of Peon in any Business / DoD Organization understands ISO Compliance.

Then there is NIST ! This is where Steven I Cooper Chairman of StrikeForce's Advisory Board) has been a Real Asset.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was founded in 1901 and now part of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

I would think that as MFA/OBB becomes ubiq that it to will fall under all three Oranizations as well just as 2FA has.

For NOW, PCI is the has the Gobal Difinitive Body covering MFA/OBB.
MONEY TALKS !

WITH SO MUCH AT STAKE ! I would not be surprised at all to see one of the Current Patent Lawsuits be Appealed and possible work it's way up to Federal Court and possibly the Supreme Court for final Determination should we not come out Victorious in any District Court.

Luckily we have Ropes & Gray (see Supreme Court at the Bottom)

I also noted your Excellent Sumation of the Webinar, and PCI in your Post.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=130275054

(FOR ALL) Two Important Things to Hightlight from the PCI MFA Document That Must be Complied with

1) Out-of-Band Authentication
Out-of-band (OOB) refers to authentication processes where authentication methods are conveyed through different networks or channels.

Where authentication factors are conveyed through a single device/channel—for example, entering credentials via a device that also receives, stores, or generates a software token—a malicious user who has established control of the device has the ability to capture both authentication factors.

Transmission of a one-time password (OTP) to a smartphone has traditionally been considered an effective out-of-band method. However, if the same phone is then used to submit the OTP—for example, via a web browser—the effectiveness of the OTP as a secondary factor is effectively nullified.

Out-of-band conveyance of authentication mechanisms is an additional control that can enhance the level of assurance for multi-factor authentication. In lieu of the ability to use out-of-band communication, the authentication process should establish controls to guarantee that the individual attempting to use the authentication is, in fact, the legitimate user in possession of the authentication factor.


2) Use of SMS for Authentication
PCI DSS relies on industry standards—such as NIST, ISO, and ANSI—that cover all industries, not just the payments industry. While NIST currently permits the use of SMS, they have advised that out-of-band authentication using SMS or voice has been deprecated and may be removed from future releases of their publication5.


https://www.ropesgray.com/practices/Appellate-and-Supreme-Court.aspx

Ropes & Gray’s experienced appellate attorneys have argued fifteen cases before the U.S. Supreme Court within the past decade.

We have filed numerous successful petitions for certiorari, ensuring that the cases that are important to our clients are among the few that the Court hears each year. The merits cases our attorneys have handled before the Court span the full range of our litigation practice and include the:

Unconstitutionality of imposing onerous new burdens on past business activity Protection of intellectual property rights against those who facilitate infringement

A group of 19 venture capital firms, in Microsoft v. i4i, explaining the importance of the clear-and-convincing standard for overcoming the presumption of a patent’s validity to investors’ decisions to fund commercialization of pharmaceutical discoveries.


Jurisdiction of bankruptcy judges
Preemption of state laws that interfere with conducting business on a national scale
Implied antitrust immunity
Limitations period for bringing securities fraud claims
False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar
Immunity of foreign states and their instrumentalities to suit
Our major successes before the Supreme Court include:

In Jones v. Harris Associates, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the deferential Gartenberg standard of judicial review that the courts have applied to fees charged by investment advisers to mutual funds.
In Ameriprise Financial v. Gallus, also involving a challenge to investment adviser fees, we successfully petitioned for certiorari from an appellate decision that departed from Gartenberg, obtaining an order remanding the case for reconsideration in light of Jones.
In Yeager v. United States, Ropes & Gray petitioned for certiorari on behalf of a former Enron official and won a ruling that the defendant’s acquittal on certain charges precluded retrying him on related charges as to which the original jury failed to reach a verdict.
In our active amicus practice, we file briefs in support of certiorari, and on the merits, on behalf of a wide range of clients, including:

Jim Obergefell and all fellow plaintiffs from Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee in Tanco v. Haslam in four landmark cases concerning whether the fundamental right to marry can be denied to same-sex couples. One of the granted petitions was filed on behalf of three Tennessee couples by Ropes & Gray, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, and several Tennessee firms.
Association of Dental Support Organizations in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC regarding the state-action immunity doctrine, which provides a narrow exception to the federal antitrust laws.
Anti-Defamation League, in Windsor v. United States, a case seeking to overturn as unconstitutional Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The Court ruled unconstitutional a key part of DOMA that denied federal benefits to same-sex couples who are legally married in the states in which they reside.
Ten private research universities, in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, regarding the use of race in the college admissions process.
Former U.S. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, former Solicitor General Drew Days III, and eight former Justice Department officials, in Shelby County v. Holder, regarding whether Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act unconstitutionally infringes upon state sovereignty by requiring covered jurisdictions to demonstrate that changes to voting laws are non-discriminatory before those laws are permitted to take effect.
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), in FTC v. Actavis, regarding liability under the antitrust laws for Hatch-Waxman patent settlements.
Ten health care provider trade associations, in Douglas v. Independent Living Centers, regarding the availability of a cause of action under the Supremacy Clause to challenge Medicaid reimbursement rate cuts.
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund and 15 other HIV-rights organizations, addressing the constitutionality of the requirement in the Affordable Care Act that most people get health insurance by 2014 or pay a tax. The recent landmark ruling from the Court upheld the constitutionality of the requirement.
The Constitution Project, in a case testing the limits on police installation and use of a GPS tracking device in a suspect’s vehicle. In a significant constitutional law victory the Court held, in United States v. Jones, that the government’s warrantless installation of the GPS device violated the Fourth Amendment.