Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
$ZRFY Zerify Survey indicates video conferencing security is a growing concern amid increasing cyber threats and fear of nation-state attacks
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2022/09/07/2511437/0/en/Zerify-Survey-indicates-video-conferencing-security-is-a-growing-concern-amid-increasing-cyber-threats-and-fear-of-nation-state-attacks.html
EDISON, N.J., Sept. 07, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Zerify, Inc., (OTCQB: ZRFY), the 21-year-old cyber security company focused on secure video conferencing solutions, today announced the findings of a survey that indicate that IT professionals are becoming increasingly concerned about the growing number of cyber threats and foreign attacks capable of impacting video conferencing. The survey, commissioned by Zerify and executed by market research firm Propeller Insights in July of 2022, involved 1,000 IT professionals - most of whom are at the director or C-Level (83.8%).
With the White House’s executive order on improving the nation’s cybersecurity, video conferencing still has not been given the specific, individualized focus it deserves despite a notable increase in virtual meetings among remote and hybrid workers across critical industries. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) developed guidelines to ensure security in video conferencing that are in accordance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) recommendations.
NIST developed a framework for Zero Trust architecture that should be considered for video conferencing. This is something that’s especially important to George Waller, EVP and co-founder of Zerify, who explains that Zero Trust in video conferencing involves important steps to elevate security, such as locking down microphones and speakers, and authorizing and authenticating every single user prior to entering a specific conference. His own early concerns and forethought about video conferencing security - and his desire to implement specific preventative measures - were mirrored by 97% of survey respondents who said they would want to know about a solution for enhanced video conferencing security.
Highlights of the survey include:
97% of respondents said they were concerned about protecting privacy and video conferencing data
92% reported that they are aware of security vulnerabilities in video conferencing platforms
Nation-state cyber threats have increased at most (81.8%) companies
The majority of IT professionals (89%) are concerned about foreign attacks as they see a rise in threats
79% of respondents reported that they were very knowledgeable about the concept and framework of Zero Trust cybersecurity, with 86% stating that their company had Zero Trust cybersecurity policies. Zero Trust is a “strategic approach to cybersecurity that secures an organization by eliminating implicit trust and continuously validating every stage of a digital interaction.”
69% believe cyber attackers could breach their video conferencing platforms and 84% stated that if they were breached, they believed attackers could steal intellectual property, sensitive company data and trade secrets.
“The results of this survey indicates broad awareness of Zero Trust cybersecurity among IT professionals, and underscore the need for video conferencing platforms to guarantee that same level of privacy and protection of proprietary data,” said Waller. “Collaborative communications is an area of heightened vulnerability as more work is conducted remotely. Video conferencing threats are increasing and decision-makers are concerned about nation-state threats as these platforms can be compromised by attackers trying to steal IP information and other valuable data. The increase in foreign attacks exacerbates security concerns for IT professionals, illustrating why it’s so important to authenticate and authorize every single video conference participant prior to their admittance into a meeting. Individualized authentication is essential to ensuring Zero Trust for the most secure types of video conferences.”
Two to one sells to buys. After 10:30 a few small buys* and then all sells!
* an interesting buy at 12:30 of 380,000
not trying. You see what you see. Old friend.
Eliminating the Jargon: An Alternative Proposal for Section 101 Reform
On August 3, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022, S.4734, which would amend the U.S. Patent Act to clarify the patent eligibility of certain technologies under 35 U.S.C. Section 101. Few would disagree that the current state of eligibility jurisprudence is in “abysmal shambles”, and recognizing that U.S. eligibility law needs changing comes from both side of the aisle, as Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) has long questioned the court-made exceptions to patent eligibility….. I have extensively followed the developments of 101 jurisprudence in the courts and the efforts of those in Congress to enact statutory changes to Section 101. In so doing, I have contemplated how Section 101 could be improved, and thus my proposal regarding how to revise the statutory language follows.
That's brutal! I almost hopped onboard about 10 years ago. So glad I didn't.
.. I have extensively followed the developments of 101 jurisprudence in the courts and the efforts of those in Congress to enact statutory changes to Section 101. In so doing, I have contemplated how Section 101 could be improved, and thus my proposal regarding how to revise the statutory language follows.
Since Kay lied to my face twice, I made it my mission to watch and then call out his scam!
LOL. I lost $10,000 when I believed Pinocchio.
LOL. I lost $10,000 when I believed Pinocchio.
I listened to Kay blabber in the recent video. If I'm not mistaken, Zerify Meet allows the meeting organizer to assign an individual username (email address??) and unique password for each invitee. Those credentials need to be typed in by an attendee before they can join a meeting. If someone passes their unique credentials to someone who then "bombs" the meeting, there would be a way to trace the "bomber" back to the invitee's.
On the flip side, conducting virtual meetings can be clumsy enough as it is. Requiring that each attendee type in their ID/password will only make the process even more fraught with potential failure.
Cracks me up how the pumpers still pump this. Well, they're only pumping to try and get the price up so they don't lose so much.
Just look at the PPS of the "new" great company! Same ol!
There is nothing stopping someone from giving out the code. Once inside, even if discovered it may be too late.
And as I stated, they can take a picture of something on the screen or even record the meeting.
Kay as usual is FOS!
There is one way and one way only, to fully protect your computer 100%... and that is to NOT connect it to the Internet. Leave it in the box! :o)
You are correct, your two IT VPs are correct. Every and anything attached to the Internet can be hacked.
Thanks for clarifying
What I saw was a recording of the interview. There was no indication that others could watch/listen live and there certainly weren't any "callers" who were invited to ask questions. Do you believe otherwise?
Because if it was just a one-on-one being recorded for posting on a web site then there is no reason that Zerify Meet could not have been used for the interview.
They all have Zoom or another well-known platforms.
Which is excellent. Plus my discussions with two IT VP's revealed they already have enterprise wide safety measures. Not just for video conferencing.
They both agreed that no matter how good any system is, someone can always take a picture of the screen!
ZOOM
Encryption: Protecting your event content by encrypting the session’s video, audio, and screen sharing. This content is protected during transit with 256-bit Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) using a one-time key for that specific session when all participants use a Zoom client.
End-to-end Encryption, when enabled, ensures that communication between all meeting participants in a given meeting is encrypted using cryptographic keys known only to the devices of those participants. This ensures that no third party -- including Zoom -- has access to the meeting’s private keys.
Advanced Chat Encryption, when enabled, allows for a secured communication where only the intended recipient can read the secured message. Zoom uses both asymmetric and symmetric algorithms to encrypt the chat session. Private keys are generated on the device and not shared. This ensures that the session cannot be eavesdropped on or tampered with.
Zoom Phone Voicemail recordings are processed and stored in Zoom’s cloud and can be managed through the secured Zoom client.
Recordings can be stored on the host’s local device with the local recording option or on Zoom’s cloud with the Cloud Recording option (available to paying customers).
Local Recording Storage: Recordings stored locally on the host’s device can be encrypted if desired using various free or commercially available tools.
Cloud Recording Storage: Cloud recordings are processed and stored in Zoom’s cloud after the meeting has ended; account owners control whether these recordings are passcode-protected. The recordings are stored in both video/audio format and audio only format.
If a meeting host enables cloud recording and audio transcripts, both will be stored encrypted. The account owner and people and apps they approve can access encrypted content stored in ZoomCloud (and Zoom can access stored content for troubleshooting if requested by the account owner).
If a meeting host enables file transfer through in-meeting chat, those shared files will be stored encrypted and will be deleted within 31 days of the meeting.
Audio Signature embeds a user's personal information into the audio as an inaudible watermark if they record during a meeting. If the audio file is shared without permission, Zoom can help identify which participant recorded the meeting.
Watermark Screenshot superimposes an image, consisting of a portion of a meeting participant’s own email address, onto the shared content they are viewing and the video of the person who is sharing their screen.
Not to be defending Kay.... he can't use his own product because all the others who want to see the interview, or whatever it was, don't have it. They all have Zoom or another well-known platform.
I sat in that conference room years ago when Kay said no R/S. Then after the R/S I sat there again and he said no R/S.
The fly would hear lies!
Pinocchio was in the office along with a tech in the server room which was not impressive at all.
Not using his own product is very telling.
Hey WBC, how you been?
Yup, same old same old here. And, over on the Yahoo board too.
There are a few hardcore pumpers there. One of them makes you think he's actually Kay!
Wow, I see SFOR has tried a rebranding.....
I also see that it is still a money stealing scheme from investors, and see some of the same ole pumpers here.....
The gift that keeps on, scamming
Oh, to be a fly on the wall of that conference room.
I think it's doubtful that Kay or Waller even leave their respective homes on any given work day. When they do meet the hot topic of conversation is what restaurant will provide lunch (paid by the company, of course).
I forgot to mention that the recent remote interview that Kay did was NOT done over Zerify Meet. You might that Mark would insist on using the company's own product for that interview.
And that's the point. The spots have nothing to do with drumming up sales. It has to do with Kay and Waller showing potential stockholders that they are pulling out all the stops to boost revenue.
Never mind that those ads ran at 1:30am when no one will see them. The boys won't mention that part.
That's when all their "spots" run!!! No way in the world they could ever afford Prime-Time.
What a joke!
Zerify's galactic headquarters in New Jersey
And a reminder:
The paid-for-TV programming platforms...
The Street's syndicated and sponsored TV networks, Newsmax TV, Fox Business Network, and Bloomberg TV
How much will this cost investors?
https://sports.yahoo.com/street-tv-signs-12-part-133000714.html
That's when all their "spots" run!!! No way in the world they could ever afford Prime-Time.
You are damn close.
From this link: https://newtothestreet.com/upcoming-airings
New to the Street appears on...
Fox Business Network Every Monday and Tuesday at 1030 PM PST | Bloomberg every other Saturday at 6 PM
Translating to Eastern Time (which sync with Zerify's galactic headquarters in New Jersey) the broadcast on FBN will be Tuesdays and Wednesday at 1:30am and on Bloomberg Saturday evening (no indication if the 6pm is also Pacific time or some other time zone.
This is Kay and Waller just trying to show that they are doing SOMETHING to justify their 6 figure salaries.
NBC-ABC-CBS?????
The paid-for-TV programming platforms...
The Street's syndicated and sponsored TV networks, Newsmax TV, Fox Business Network, and Bloomberg TV
How much will this cost investors?
https://sports.yahoo.com/street-tv-signs-12-part-133000714.html
Probably at 1AM Eastern.
Would anyone here please join me in requesting iHub Admin to post ZRFY NEWS on the News tab for this board, instead of the old SFOR message board? I have asked 4 times, and they say “all set”, but it isn’t.
Time on NBC-ABC-CBS-FOX-BLOOM B- AND OTHERS.
Three to one sells to buys! Kay and krew must have a big party planned for the three day weekend.
Here it comes, Surfkast.
Not happening with this dilution machine.
There is no reason to buy any stock. In the end you are in it to just make a profit and sell it.
Because there is no reason to buy this failure of a company!
Why don’t we just run this to $1?
Like to see this back at .08-.10.
The Good Ole Days...
Indeed, it was more of a rhetorical question. These guys are shameless thieves of shareholder value. They borrow the money, pay themselves, and we pay off the debt.
Where did the money actually go? Again.
Easy one to answer: paychecks and benefits for Kay and his band of thieves.
Wow, they signed on to repaying $7.5M, plus future royalties, as repayment for a $1.5M loan?
ZRFY has no incentive to actually litigate this, other than giving it lip service, since the money is repaid "only in the event that the company achieves recoveries.....". I seem to remember another $1M loan to pursue patent litigation a few years ago, but maybe it was this one and I misremember the amount.
Regardless, having to repay 5X + on a loan is sheer desperation and the terms indicate an implicit unwillingness to act in good faith by the company. Which should surprise no one who follows this company and makes one wonder how the lenders could possibly have made the loan.
Back then, in 2017, BlankRome was representing SFOR on contingency. Ropes & Gray did charge for the miserable job they did at Appeals Court, but there's no way it came to $1.5M. Where did the money actually go? Again.
Hard to watch this stock at these prices.
Cannot disagree with you...
Your opinion is based on the assumption that Zerify exists to (eventually) reward shareholders. Quite simply, Zerify exists to provide Mark Kay and his band of cronies with paychecks and benefits. Period.
Mark is fine modifying the terms of warrants because that means the exercise cash will be used to back up the paychecks for just a little longer.
Reframe your perspective and you will see that what is happening makes perfect sense.
IMO, this was inadvisable and reflects deteriorating conditions, not confidence in near or intermediate prospects for deals or substantial revenue.
Just saw that they changed the terms of the prospectus of August 15, 2022, to reduced the price from .02 to .01. If the warrants are exercised, it appears it would dilute common shares about 10%. However, the buyers have 5 years from the initial exercise date to convert their warrants to common shares, at .01. Previously, I recall, a similar prospectus indicated the price would be .05. Then that price was changed to .02. Each time, these prospectuses would appear to act as a fraud upon individual investors in the open market, by purporting to represent a current fair price of the stock, then changing it in a subsequent publication. Now the company will only get $500,000 from the sale of the shares in the recent prospectus, it states. This is only 20% of what was represented in a prior prospectus. IMO, this was inadvisable and reflects deteriorating conditions, not confidence in near or intermediate prospects for deals or substantial revenue.
More worthles fluff. Do some real DD and see what Kay and his company is about.
Read the financials for the past 20 years.
As far as their new product, it is only for video conferencing., Major companies already have enterprise programs to cover their entire corporation.
StrikeForce Technologies
This information found below is from different Mods. It can not be removed without their permission. Any additions must go below the last entry.
WARNING: PLEASE USE THE SYMBOL SFOR OR COMPANY NAME WHEN POSTING-USE OF ABBREVIATIONS SUCH AS "SF" WILL BE DELETED!
This board is to be used to discuss SFOR(D) the company, its officers and its stock. Messages about other posters or intentions, the mods, name calling, profanity, deletions etc. are off topic at the very least.
To answer some of your questions regarding posts, please read the following, that you should have known already, taken from the Ihub FAQ section of the Ihub handbook. So you can stop with the moronic conspiracy theories about the Mods and Admins on this board!
Regarding libel and slander suspected posts:
"Libel can only become a fact if a judge says it is. Nobody else, including Moderators or Site Admins, can nor will determine that Member posted content is libelous. Members are often of the opinion that a post is libelous, but no Moderator should act based on that opinion. Libel is decided by a judge in a court of law after conducting proper evidentiary hearings. If such a judgment is issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, iHub will abide by that ruling. Otherwise, it is not a matter that Site Admin or Mods can decide. Our only role here is to ensure adherence to the Terms of Use. Anecdotally, quite often the information that some Members allege to be libelous ends up being accurate, which is why neither Site Admins nor Moderators remove posts on the basis of being allegedly false or libelous."
Regarding posting lies (or what some posters feel are lies):
"Mods or Admin do not make decisions about the veracity of information posted. "Truth" is a very subjective term and neither Site Admin nor Mods remove posts based on judgments of this type. Each reader has both the right and obligation to decide for themselves if they feel a post is accurate and its author credible. As a participant on the board, the Moderators' recourse is the same as any other Member; to debate the information contained in the post without attacking the Member, or to ignore it. Attack the message, not the messenger."
Regarding a good DD post with a personal attack lumped in:
If a post is 99% on topic and 1% personal attack it still needs to be removed. Personal attacks in any form are disrespectful of others and are unwelcome on the site. These types of gratuitous comments also create noise and dilute the quality of the board. When a Member attacks another poster, other participants inevitably feel the need to respond, either agreeing or defending. Then others feel the need to respond to these…and so on and so on ad nauseam. Pretty soon the board has devolved into personal attacks and discussion about other Members, i.e., noise and no signal. There are plenty of other sites that allow these types of posts and it is difficult to find any meaningful content on such sites. The goal at iHub is to have all information, whether positive, neutral or negative, discussed in a civil manner, free of personal attacks.
Regarding proof of member post content:
Members do not have to provide "proof" when offering their opinions. There is no requirement for Members to substantiate their posts. Veracity of posts and credibility of the author is determined by the reader.
http://www.strikeforcetech.com/index.aspx
SFOR Security Details Outstanding Shares confirmed unchanged as of 8/19/2016
|
Market Value1 | $9,497,134 | a/o Aug 19, 2016 | |
Authorized Shares | 5,000,000,000 | a/o May 16, 2016 | |
Outstanding Shares | 2,282,964,907 | a/o May 16, 2016 | |
-Restricted | Not Available | ||
-Unrestricted | Not Available | ||
Held at DTC | Not Available | ||
Float | 2,282,934,907 | a/o May 16, 2016 |
Leadership Team:
http://www.guardedid.com/about_leadership.aspx
Advisory Board:
http://www.guardedid.com/about_advisory.aspx
StrikeForce Technologies' IR Contact
Mark L. Kay
CEO
(732) 661-9641
marklkay@strikeforcetech.com
NOW SOLD IN TARGET
http://www.target.com/p/mobile-trust-keystroke-encryption-software-2-mobile-devices/-/A-50575250#prodSlot=medium_1_1&term=mobiletrust
http://www.target.com/p/guarded-id-21-keystroke-encryption-software-2-pcs/-/A-50568581#prodSlot=medium_1_1&term=guarded+id
http://anti-keylogger-software-review.toptenreviews.com/?full_site=true
StrikeForce Technologies is a leading provider that Specializes in Identity Theft Online solutions for consumers, industry and government. By leveraging StrikeForce's breakthrough technologies, consumers and organizations can finally secure their electronic assets while protecting their employees, business partners, suppliers and customers from malicious hacking and theft.
StrikeForce's revolutionary technologies are represented by a proprietary software product suite that guards both businesses and consumers from keylogging, phishing, malware, spyware and other identity attacks and scams.
For more on StrikeForce Technologies, see our corporate web site.
RECENT CYBER BREACHES ALL POSITIVE FOR SFOR (Thanks TradeSlinger)
The threat from cybercrime? 'You ain't seen nothing yet"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100959481
August 29,2013
Telecoms companies now subject to new personal data breach notification rules
http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/august/telecoms-companies-now-subject-to-new-personal-data-breach-notification-rules/
August 28, 2013
Phishing email grants hackers access to DNS records of major websites
http://www.scmagazine.com//phishing-email-grants-hackers-access-to-dns-records-of-major-websites/article/309274/#
August 2013 CyberBreaches...
Infosec 2013: Cost of cyber breaches rises three-fold, research shows
http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240182218/Infosec-2013-Cost-of-cyber-breaches-rises-three-fold-research-shows
C/Net News:League of Legends is hacked,
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57599450-83/league-of-legends-is-hacked-with-crucial-user-info-accessed/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57599646-83/cybercrooks-use-ddos-attacks-to-mask-theft-of-banks-millions/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57600336-83/syrian-electronic-army-implicated-in-twitter-new-york-times-attacks/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57598603-83/google-confirms-android-flaw-that-led-to-bitcoin-theft/
Nasdaq outage resembles hacker attacks
http://www.usatoday.com/story/cybertruth/2013/08/22/nasdaq-outage-aligns-with--denial-of-service-attacks/2687323/
August 2013 global threats
http://www.scmagazine.com//august-2013-global-threats/slideshow/1502/#0
LivingSocial
http://www.scmagazine.com/top-five-data-breaches-in-2013so-far/slideshow/1387/
Daily-deal website LivingSocial confirmed that its computer systems were hacked, resulting in “unauthorized access.”
The company updated its password encryption method after the breach impacted more than 50 million users. Names, email addresses, dates of birth, and salted passwords were stolen.
1-15 June 2013 Cyber Attacks Timeline
http://hackmageddon.com/2013/07/01/1-15-june-2013-cyber-attacks-timeline/
http://www.strikeforcetech.com |
IDGenie Mobile Security
|
|
OTCQB (as if that means anything)
SFOR now on OTCQB Benefits of uplisting to OTCQB per OTCMarkets website as follows:
"The OTCQB is considered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as an "established public market" for the purpose of determining the public market price when registering securities for resale with the SEC. The OTC Pink is not considered as such and most broker dealers will not trade or recommend OTC Pink stocks. Because the OTCQB dramatically increases transparency, reporting standards, management certification and compliance requirements, the majority of broker dealers trade stocks on the OTCQB. Historically this has resulted in greater liquidity and awareness for companies that reach the OTCQB tier.
Key elements and benefits of uplisting to the OTCQB include:
?Companies must remain current and compliant in their reporting to the SEC
?Minimum bid price test of $0.01 removes companies that are most likely to be the subject of dilutive stock fraud schemes and promotion
?Improved investor confidence through verified information, confirming that the Company Profile displayed on www.otcmarkets.com is current and complete
?Annual management certification process to verify officers, directors, controlling shareholders, and shares outstanding
?Greater information availability for investors through the OTC Disclosure & News Service
?Transparent prices for investors through full-depth of book with Real Time Level 2 quotes"
NEXT QUARTER
500 to 1 Reverse Split Coming, end of April, 2020
https://www.otcmarkets.com/filing/html?id=14077781&guid=v5zHUFJLzJ56Ayh
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |