awk re: Dell SCRs

I wonder if those will be SCR-embedded keyboards?

I have always thought that would be a far more elegant solution for SCRs.

VH2, nice work in calling these class action law houses. Great sleuthing about. Your efforts are appreciated.

Regards,

Ramsey2

Unclever, way to go!

Great powers of deduction on the "shares that SKS sold" were actually the SSPX shares that Wave sold.

My goodness, these class action firms' DD stinks!

and awk,

Did you notice how Wave ('lil ole pre-revenue/development stage Wave) was the first name on Enderle's list! Note how the list is mainly in alphabetical order, one exception being that it begins with Wave.

The Trusted Computing Group was formed specifically to address problems like this. It is made up of a core group of companies that include AMD, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Sony, and Sun Microsystems. In addition to this core group there are over 40 additional companies that contribute to the effort and provide a more international base from which to drive the solution. This group includes firms like Wave Systems, VIA Technologies, ATI Technologies, Gemplus, Infineon, Legend Limited Group, Gateway, ARM, Toshiba, Fujitsu, Philips, NVIDIA, Phoenix, RSA Security, Seagate, Utimaco Safeware AG, and VeriSign.

bbigtim, thanks for checking in! e/

nice summary go-ks! e/

Waiting for bigtim to check in. e/

Whitewash

I think the conspiracy theory is highly remote as the risk to companies involved would be too high.

I do think that the law firms behind this must see the potential to collect or why would they bother.

In any case, it's this sort of thing that can give the legal profession a bad name, even though there are many good attorneys out there.

Doma

Yes, I recall there were numerous erroneous reports relating to Wave's Intel and IBM PRs. I don't believe a public company is required to correct misleading media coverage of their annoucements or developments.

Even if Feeney did sell his shares before Lark's DJ NewsWire statement, and even if Feeney knew of the misleading coverage, I doubt even that is illegal providing the source for the misinformation was not from within Wave.

Whitewash

I wonder if:

1. Decision to sue based on assumption that Wave will be doing big business. Why sue a company with as little capital as Wave has, unless the plaintiffs believed there would be a pot of gold down the road?

2. Could this be a nefarious plot to knock Wave out of the TC picture for the price of Wave's IP...force a buyout or whatever? I doubt it, but still...

Thanks Doma. I neglected to get into the Lark correction since I could not recall the details.

FWIW, I e-mailed both legal firms that are involved with these law suits, pointing out that this situation is of great concern to loyal Wave shareholders who are numerous in number.

I don't expect any response from these leeches.

I just don't see how it's wrong for Wave to issue honest factual PRs that are intended to create a public interest in the company's potential. That is precisely what the Cubic, Intel and IBM PRs did. As far as I understand it, it is fair play to release info that may create a market interest in the company's stock. It is perfectly legal to do that where one possible consequence is to bolster or support the share price in the interest of a future equity offering, as long as the info released is factual and therefore not misleading.

The only cloud I ever saw was if Feeney's shares were sold before Lark issued the correction.

Except for the possible Feeney issue, I guess all the insider selling was OK. Since the Wave PRs were factual and not misleading, I am not aware of any insider selling violations, but then I am not an expert.

Correction, it was Reuters.

eamonnshute, you are right it was Reuters not DJ Newswire, that issued the corrections.

Lucky

Wave never issued a corrected PR because Wave never issued a PR that needed correcting...at least not a PR relating to the relevant Intel/IBM PRs.

DJ Newswire did eventually issue a correction of their own faulty IBM release...the release that referred to an embedding of the Wave product. I believe DJ issued the correction at Wave's insistence following the announcement of the SEC investigation. So, that was months after the original news releases.

Confirmed by SKS e-mail today...

Yes, Wave will be attending the IBM ParnerWorld Conference here in Las Vegas later this month (Feb. 29-March 3).

Doma, just a reminder...

Wave lists IBM as a partner here:

http://www.wave.com/about/alliances.html

Nice find Doma...

I have an inquiry into Wave as to whether they will attend.

GoFigure1/VH2

Excuse me VH2...you also get credit for that nice Atmel find!

go-ks

You may be right about the capabilities of Atmel's TPM offerings, but the fact remains that Atmel is in IBM and IBM users are one Wave's main channels for early adoption of Embassy Trust Server services...right?

GoFigure1...nice find...

Since TPM ICs can be used to ensure that emails are accepted only from 'authenticated' sources, including identification of the actual hardware generating the email, they could have prevented these crimes.

I believe the authentication of the (e-mail) sender's hardware is a job for Wave's Embassy Trust Servers!

weets...yes, Len Veil! e/

Snackman

With all this discussion about SKS and Lark I would like to add, let's not forget about Brian Berger...he is another Wave asset!

exactly weets...Wave's management of trust...and,

things really get interesting for Wave when TCG moves from a keys management technology to a trusted applications technology! This will happen when NGSCB is deployed on LaGrande (and the AMD equivalent) CPUs.

Management of the life cycles of trusted applications...applets/trustlets...Wave IP!

awk, IMO you are definitely on the right track. Great summaries!

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2233472

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2234009

Wildman

I am engaged in discussing with Wave the growing list of TPM implementations that are non-PC or that in any case are additional to the well known PC implementations.

So far we have heard of:


Sentivision (STBs)

Densitron (gaming and other verticals)

Broadcom (unknown)


Know of any others?

TCG tidbits

TCG lists IDF as an event on their webiste, so I presume this means TCG will have an exhibit there.

Sentivision and Densitron are not yet listed as adopters. Does anybody know if all vendors who employ TPMs are then entitled to an adopters listing at the TCG?

Wildman

So you mean BRCM constructs their own TPM and integrates it into their products?

In any case, I presume it BRCM TPM-enabled products will require attestation services?

Doma

Do you know who makes the BRCM TPM or is it going to be BRCM itself?

Thanks Doma...I have alerted Wave. e/

idea for DD'ers

Anytime a new TPM deployment is discovered, it couldn't hurt IMO to alert Wave. Wave needs to know of every single market opportunity which I believe they pretty much do.

Recently I ran the Sentivision/Atmel STB by Wave. I believe this is a possible platform for Wavexpress and perhaps an attestation opportunity for Wave. In such a case TvTonic might prompt the STB user to Wave trust services.

PM-enabled again. e/

Great post Weby! e/

ESCROW...Good point Bingoman! e/

Nice work awk! e/

Doma, thanks for Sentivision link. e/

Attn: svenm/Doma/anybody

I thought we determined that Sentivision's STB is to employ an Atmel TPM. I am running this by Wave. Does anybody have a link or otherwise specific confirmation.

TIA

zen88

Wave is doing some business now. Word begins to get out after a while.

thanks svenm for your Sentivision DD

If indeed Sentivision's Atmel TPMs are EK loaded by Atmel, then I wonder if Wave played a role. If so, I would expect a link from the device to Wave for the end user. Otherwise, how would the STB user know where to go for network attestation?

Hopefully announcements for bundling or embedding deals are just around the corner. A Windows embedding would be the granddaddy of them all!

svenm re: prompts (links) to TTP

I think you have hit on an extremely key issue, namely there has to be a link to a TTP or choices for a TTP for the end user. At this early stage Wave is marketing to known volume enterprise users but what about later when TCG systems are deployed to consumers...how will the end user identify an infrastructure manager?

I think bundling a download with the device or perhaps embedding something will be required if the user is to be provided a link to prospective managers. There are PCs, set top boxes, mobile devices and whatever else becomes trusted.

We have been told that Wave is capable of providing endorsement key (EK) loading technology to TPM manufacturers...it's plausible that Wave has provided this to NSM...in any case the NSM user is linked to Wave through the bundling of ETS by NSM. What about Atmel and Infineon...will they provide an embedded or bundled link to Wave? I should think that would be a consideration of Wave's in providing these manufacturers with EK loading technology.

It's plausible that a TCG strategy is to provide the end user with links to prospective providers of trusted server services in order to facilitate the TCG deployment. Hopefully Wave has a lock on this pending successful Embassy Trust Server trials.

Doma P.S.

In any case, I have thought Wave's IP plays a role in providing EK-loading servers to the manufacturers. If true, that could mean Wave has first mover status to be the TTP for the end user. If Wave provides the technology for EK-loading servers, who else would be standing in line at the present time to be the TTP?

Doma

I thought the manufacturer acts as the "TTP" in recording the EK, and that is then passed along to another TTP later, but then what do I know!

Appartently you believe that there would need to be a second party to the manufacturer to attest to the creation and loading of the EK.

Perhaps I just don't understand!