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.
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.
The problem with one new board member
is
very obvious. They have one vote. Should the rest of the board remain status quo, the only thing that has been gained is one voice that will hopefully do the right thing for the shareholders while advancing the company forward in a positive manner.
Alea has made what I feel is a pretty decent proposal. Kudos for that.
What really needs to happen imo is a board of guys like the one DIG posted, those who have some very real and hands on business expertise in sucessfully guiding a company forward to profitability while reigning in expenses.
Until that BOD comprises more than half of that same old rubber stamping loyal to the family bunch, nothing will change and alas, the same old folks that keep on pumping money into that scenario will continue to do so, thus emboldening and encouraging the same behavior patterns.
FWIW,
micro...
Wave posted in excess of a 29 percent loss
on revenues. The result? The executives get rewarded for these results yet again. Is anyone going to wake up and see that the problem is not the tech or the products, its the SALES team and the management! But gokite has been pointing that out for some, as have I.
micro....
Hi Orda!
Good question.
Here's yet another one. How many shares have the management actually purchased with their own money?
micro...
kitesurf
Why? To gen up more people to pump more of their hard earned money into the company so SKS can have another big bonus for delivering such fantastic results like all the rest of them, another loss for the company.
Yes sir, the argument about hiring people who know people and they cost money is not the best one around.
Why don't we try something different since those things have not worked for a LONG TIME now. Try hiring a real chief executive officer and give him a few years to generate some results.
Why not? Nothing else has worked for this one with respect to the profitability of this company after more big promises, again....
the best,
micro...
gucci1
You are absolutely spot on with those observations.
Sales to companies have already been added on so Alea's theorem holds no water as the results are always the same in spite of that. Actually, that theorem sounds like something SKS would have said and every single quarter I see the same or worse results. Another loss, and that in spite of changing the accounting to try to make it less.
Great comments. Good observations.
micro...
Hi jakes dad!
Congrats to you sir! You are one of I am sure several who have managed to do that.
Unfortunately, my point was how many have invested that are not the regulars here, once were and no longer have been seen in awhile, that have not? Do you know them all?
Well, of course not, and neither does lugan or anyone else, and that was my point. There is no absolute certainty there. I know SOME made some money and for them I am very glad. They are the exceptions. But I know I am underwater, I know several others personally in the same boat, and nobody knows how many others that do not participate on this thread.
That was the point. Again, congrats to those that did and taking nothing from them, there are plenty who are underwater and were not going to throw in more money when they already saw their investment dwindle down to a mere fraction of what it was worth when they bought it. Yes, they are more cautious or not as daring or whatever, but NOBODY knows how many either direction so to say anything with 100 percent certainty is a fallacy at best.
best to you,
micro...
Hi 24601!
You are
absolutely 100 percent right on the money!And there have been lots of ways to do it as well! Being simply a LONG and holding was not the way. Being a TRADER was and dare I mention that many a short made a fortune with Wavx during these past years. That was just one way as I know you are very aware of.
You made a valid and salient point indeed sir!
the best,
micro...
Lugan,
Good afternoon. I could not help but read your OPINION that most longs are in the money. I don't know how one goes about substantiating that as a fact but I also know several longs that haven;t bought ten cents more worth of stock from the time of the 1:3 reverse split and I know for a fact they are not in the money or anywhere near it.
You would have had to sink a BOATLOAD of money into this if you were a really longtime long and bought at higher levels prior to the split.
I do not know that your opinion is accurate regarding MOST LONGS are in the money and the fact is, you really don't either. I know several who are way under water as a matter of fact. It is just not possible to validate that view I am afraid. It definitely is wishful thinking though and also tends to suggest that your definition of a LONG is someone who just kept pouring money into a stock after it reverse split on you and has lost money for 24 straight years, the tech not withstanding.
You see, the technology is one thing, while being long a stock position is entirely something else, and while I get it that the most vocal folks are going to continue to pour money into this company, that doesn't mean that those who already have poured substantial sums into it already and held that position all this time are both above water and not a good and faithful LONG.
I was just wondering how you could prove your statement, that's all.
micro...
GREAT POST X-POINT!
Just another good article on the collaboration between NcAfee, Intel, Wind River and how they are working together in the security aspects of computing acrosss a whole rannge of platforms, endpoints and embedded security.
Great post,
micro...
Weby,
At this point in wave's very long time line, I would be happy if ANYBODY followed BASF.
I don't know about Greg S and doom and despair. What I do know from a business standpoint because I have a few years in this area, is that I would always prefer to be able to MAKE a product that I need rather than procure it from someone else and be dependent upon that vendor. In fact, EVERY head of the corporations I know and have dealt with over 35 years all have that same outlook and philosophy.
It isn't new or strange or different. So why wouldn't Intel, since they already supply ALL the silicon to this trusted computing platform, want to also furnish the managing software as well?
Maybe they will and maybe they won't, but it did not hurt a thing for asking the question and giving it a little consideration. It is a possibility and from what I have read, that may be more realistic than we can imagine. 7.7 billion is a lot of money and as I quoted you already directly from Intel regarding McAfee, it is about pushing security down below the root!!! So where does McAfee fit into this then?
That is ALL I am asking here. Not defaming Wave in any way shape or form.
Take care,
micro...
Bluewave
SInce you claim to have read so much about McAfee,
perhaps you are then familiar with the stated reason from INTEL themselves about WHY they "ate McAfee" ?
I quoted the publicly stated reason to Weby, which of course demonstrates that I believe you need to do some more reading, or possibly even begin. I posted an entire series of articles regarding this on another website as well.
Concerning further acquisitions, of course anybody can buy anybody. But that was not the case here and with the Israeli company that deals with Hypervisors. You did know that didn't you? You honestly want everyone to believe that was just accidental as well?
I think your vision is a tad jaded and sensitive as well.
Why is it nobody is allowed to bring up other possibilities with regard to competition or possible impending competition for Wave? If anything is said that is obvious, like 24 years without a profit, it is like we just said something that wasn't true.
You don;t know much about McAfee by your last comment and you forget that INtel already knows a LOT about TPM technology, as they provide their own TPM's in their own silicon on their own motherboards on theoir own systems.
Do you getthe idea? They can basically do it all by themselves except have the management software, YET!
You should seriously, along with Weby, do some research on what McAfee is capable of and has been into and HOW MANY customers they have already in this sector in a short time.
You will be very surprised. Again, INtel did not spend 7Billion, seven hundred million dollards on McAfee for their anti-virus or just to say they are part of the INtel family. There is plenty of Articles available to read by GOOGLING that specifically tell you, and I already have done that. You should to as long as you are willing to be open to a questioning spirit of WHY.
Have a nice day,
micro...
wave shareholder since 1997......
Weby old friend,
you don't know much about McAfee do you?
I was told bluntly by Barge the other day that I should do some research and substantiate what I was questioning. I did that. I posted what I found. And I read a LOT that I did not post because it wasn't needful. But if that is all you think McAfee is and does, you are under a false impression.
That wasn't why Intel spend 7 Billion dollars Weby.
Here is a quote from Intel
"Intel: 'We ate McAfee to slip security into silicon'"
There is an article that goes with this.
As a LONG TIME HOLDER of WAVX shares, circa 1997, and still owning every single one today, here is what I am interested in as an investor: MAKING MONEY.
So far it hasn;t happened.
Will it? Maybe. I am in it to find out. But you know this.
In the meantime, that does not mean that I close my eyes to see what the industry GIANTS are doing. I have said for many years that gorillas do not like to play nicely where it comes to large amounts of money. They do not SHARE nicely.
Intel KNOWS it MUST at THIS TIME PRESENT use WAVE'S ESC to manage the V-Pro tech in Intel's silicon.
Do you, if you are Intel, WANT to be dependent on some other small company to manage all the technology you have built into your hardened silicon??? Not if you can help it!
If wave has something up its sleeves, it would be a good time to finally show it imo. My ears are truly getting numb to the "wait till next quarter" mantra. Next quarter is always the same.
That is the problem. Too many quarters have gone by and have given other time to enter into this space and be able to compete and who knows how much of the pie has been lost?
Just saying Weby, as I Have all along, it would be good for folks to take the blinders off and be aware of their surroundings.
That's all. Nothing dark or ominous there.
And please, call off the attack dog.
Thanks Weby,
micro...
Hi Barge!
Yes, I know ESC is bundled already and that is because this took place long before the recent acquisitions of McAfee and other software companies.
All I am saying Barge is that for right now, yes, ESC is able to manage the security functions Intel built into its silicon.
Do you think that maybe Intel may just possibly decide that they would prefer to have their own management software instead of someone else's?
DO you believe Intel acquired McAfee because they are in love with another of many antivirus software companies?
They bought McAfee because of their expertise in areas other than that. Just try to ask yourself why the Hypervisor company AND McAfee both in the past few months. That's all I am saying. It IS possible per SKS's own mouth and words that a couple million and a year or two and....... Well, INtel has the money, the experienced software engineers now, ALL the silicon, and time plus instant name and brand recognition.
Just something to ponder.
micro...
deering1
I cannot tell you why. With the gathering of the technically skilled software companies already in the hypervisor business and with Intel and McAfee's stated goals of wanting security below the operating system layer and stack, which sounds an awful lot like TC to me, is there a possibility with all the manpower and capital that would be needed available maybe they don't need wavx, or Infineon or anyone else in the future????
Maybe Intel isn't really all that hepped up about Wavx? I don't know. Why else would Intel be putting together the pieces of the entire puzzle under their umbrella?
I wouldn't buy wavx if I didn't need to. Like it or not, Intel is gathering the expertise they did not have before relative to Secured and Trusted computing all under the Intel dominion. That is what all the articles are adding up to.
Obviously Intel did not spend over 7 Billion for McAfee to acquire an antivirus software company.
I'm just looking at DOTS with Intel and in this space. Competition possibly from a gorilla that already supplies almost entirely ALL the silicon for this stuff by themselves.
Why not complete the puzzle then?
Worth considering.....
Best Regards,
micro...
Intel Buys Client Hypervisor
http://cloudcomputing.sys-con.com/node/1528087
Intel has bought four-year-old Israeli start-up called Neocleus - at least its people and technology - a rare albeit market-sputtering Xen-based bare-metal client hypervisor designed for security and focused on the enterprise. Apparently it can deliver VDI offline.
This article among several simply shows that Intel not only has purchased McAfee, a strong security software developer, but also pretty quietly acquired an Israeli Hypervisor maker as well.
Why does this matter? Well, everyone can speculate on their own of course but I am only posting the "signs" that Intel already has all the security hardware on its various chips and chipsets but it heretofore did not have the software enabling means and so other companies like Infineon and Wave among others have provided the software management of of the physical silicon security sets already included in the hardware provided by Intel.
With the acquisitions of these security software companies, they now have the abilities to start developing their own complete package with their own BRAND and name recognition and let;'s face it, they have a HUGE customer base already.
Is this an imminent threat to Wave? AT the moment, likely not. But it could well be that in the not too distant future I wouldn't be surprised to see a complete turnkey trusted security system that says "Intel Inside" and its all INtel and nnobody else needed to manage V-Pro capabilities.
Just some speculations that are something to be mindful of imo.
micro...
Hi Wavedreamer!
I have no qualms about ARM's Trustzone at all or Trusted Execution Technology or any other platform that provides security at the root level.
Yes, those numbers are a good beginning. Here is the thing I was getting at.
In a series of articles I posted it was made clear WHY Intel purchased McAfee and it is all about MARKET SHARE of the TRUSTED COMPUTING Security segment. McAfee will help provide Intel with the experienced software developers andprogrammers to execute and implement the apps that Intel is building into its own hardware and chipsets.
This way, THEY as a team, do not require an outside party when they can be one stop shopping.
This is what it looks like to me. It isn't here yet but the interviews certainly have suggested clearly that it is being worked on. And I believe they have plenty of money to get it accomplished.
This is WHY Wave's timeline for execution and this space's is so critical. The BIG BOYS are not going to play nicely and they don't like to share.
the best,
micro...
WHY
do you believe that the short position is at such a high percentage to begin with? Could it be that because each quarter we are offering up acceptance that the management never posts a profit and hence, we embolden the short investors by our own actions or in Wave's case, lack of ever having a profit?
There is a reason for all those short positions. I do not profess to know what it is but would at least attempt to examine why that may be. If we have yet another CC without a profit again all we have done is succeed in emboldening those who would short.
Just my opinion,
micro....
Question regarding TPM and Identity
Why couldn't individuals simply keep their information stored and locked up in their TPM instead of having to establish it within a government repository?
Wasn't that the original idea? Hold onto your privacy within the hardened silicon?
Just thinking out loud.
TIA,
micro...
Good article basically.
There are always people who have comments within an article that strile me or anyone as somewhat absurd.
Like this one for instance:
"The question is whether the private sector will step up and do what’s necessary to make sure consumer privacy continues to be protected. Since technology will continue to evolve, the government will have to stay involved with the industry-led credentialing process, said Susan Landau, a fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University and a former senior staff engineer at Sun Microsystems Inc.
Harris said government officials should bring a spray bottle and catnip to these meetings.
“It’s going to require a level of cat herding and staying on it for the government,” she said. "
The government will have to stay involved???????
Name ONE agency that the government is involved in that isn;t bleeding red ink or having its own issues with being hacked????
Name ANYTHING the government does better than the private sector other than field an army.
WHY does the government need to be involved in the first place? They don't have enough unsolved problems as it is?
The other thing about the article is that it does point out the INVASIVENESS of government gathering the identities so it is now a "voluntary" thing with "several" identity repositories in government hands".
Hmmm. Seems like other people think like me. I love this article because it points out the DANGERS associated, or POSSIBLE dangers.
The great news for investors, INCLUDING MYSELF, is that it gets some publicity for the company.
Thanks for posting this!
micro...
Would NSTIC
be considered a consumer (personl) useage of TPM security as opposed to a commercial useage. It seems by the videos and info being put forth that this is beoing maketed heavily toward INDIVIDUALS. Does that mean the old axiom that TPM's are really geared toward the enterprises may be a thing of the past?
micro...
tkc,
I understand security and trusted computing and the need to keep from being hacked.
What I don't understand is how we went from that to a "NATIONAL IDENTITY".
That phrase is not synonomous with Securing the government's gaping security holes in their own computers.
Why don;t they just use the existing available hardware to do that for all their agencies and leave out the "NATIONAL IDENTTY" garbage?
Identity. Whose identity?
I'm just saying you may trust this bunch, but there are as many who do not......
Encouraging is the word
I would use to describe today's BASF announcement. A small order when looking at scalability but it is a large corporation with global presence and the upside is that when the software is installed and BASF has a good experience with it, they would bring good credibility to Wave's products as well as very good references for prospective customers.
Nice to see the sale announced.
micro...
Tsunami
Question please?
Where does Wave fit into that announcement between Gemalto and Docomo? It seems NTT Docomo needed something from Gemalto and there was no mention of Trusted and aSecured connections provided by Wave in that. Can you elaborate please?
TIA,
micro...
Intel Q57 and 3450 chipset overview
http://download.intel.com/pressroom/kits/embedded/pdfs/Q57_3450_chipset.pdf
If you notice, this chipset, used with V-Pro capable and TXT provides the needed TPM for TXT.
micro...
This is what I was looking for a couple of weeks ago.
Intel's website regarding
Setting up a V-Pro system is very interesting.
I looked at that last week when WaveDreamer and I were talking about V-Pro and what it actually required.
If one looks at the steps that Intel shows, one of them is "selecting the right software" to be able to accomplish various tasks that an organization would want to be able to do. That enabling software is a pretty long list and several of those companies listed do quite a bit.
It seems they list three that can perform remote encryption management. ERAS is one. Credant Mobile Guardian is another and also Softex Omnipass Securex. I suppose that was all they were aware of when they put together that chart.
Thanks to Waveway for posting a number for me to call at Intel. I will do so as soon as I get a moment.
Will post what I find out for the board. I am trying to ascertain whether Intel has included a TPM in its chipsets that constitute the North Bridge of the mainboard.
V-Pro is certainly about enabling customers to utilize the technologies it has provided. The question I am trying to resolve in my mind is how exactly this is a direct benefit to WAVX other than wave's ability to manage a TPM and also enterprise-wide management controls of networks and interoperability across various platforms.
But what exactly does that ability have to do with V-Pro is what I am missing and attempting to ascertain. Sorry if my looking into this specifically has caused and angst.
micro...
CSL
I believe if you read Gokite's posts
you will discover he
has stated the same thing many times about the company needing to be the ones to make sales and chiding the beloved management for failing in that duty.
I did not notice you praising him for that very same observation previously. I guess he must have been right now that someone else has repeated that very same position?
Waveway,
And how would I do that? I am not bashful. I believe it is a legitimate question that really has not been addressed.
You got a phone number or can point me to one that I can call and ask? I am on a borrowed computer so availability is limited for me till I return home.
Thanks,
micro...
W Dreamer,
Me, a shorter? You really do not know me if that is your assumption or someone else has told you that. I am a long time holder of wave stock, back to the days when Weby got in, 1997. I have every single share of wavx stock I have purchased.
What I do that bothers many is question things and not take "stock" statements at face value. Being in top management for over 35 years gives me a differing perspective than most, and coupling that with degrees in engineering, business and another area of my personal life outside of work and business, I try to keep an unbiased view.
Sure, people here don't like people on the other wavx board.
They are not willing to listen to or consider any other possibilities that all may not be rosy as they want to believe in waveland. That is their choice to remain one sided in all their perspective but it does not make anyone who thinks differently than that a bad person. They simply see things differently.
How far back in wave's history do you go if I may ask?
I am not willing to close doors on ANY information so long as it can be substantiated by more than innuendo, which is WHY I asked about things written on White Papers that did not categorically say that a TPM MANAGEMENT software from an outside vendor, (could Infineon's work as well?) MUST be utilized.
I also read from one of the links I posted that keys from V-Pro 2 were stored on Intel's chipset which resides on the mainboard?
Did you see that? That is more than a tad confusing because we are seeing an image of an intel mainboard with a V-Pro Sandy Bridge processor, talking about V-Pro utilities, and a picture of the Intel Chipset on the board, but no separate TPM showing on the board.
Is there a TPM in that Intel Chipset?
That is the kind of thing that silence has been the most deafening thing here on. Can you please answer that for me, or perhaps Sheldon? This is a legitimate question that will help unveil some of the myriads of mysteries surrounding this.
DOES Intel NEED WAVX for it's V-Pro utilities to work?
The word NEED or REQUIURE are the keys and is what I am trying to uncover.
I already memorized the phraseology "TPM's are good for Wavx" half a decade ago. I have yet to see why that is the case but it makes some people feel better saying it I guess.
So, this is where I am and what I am trying to ascertain.
Can you verify for me from a source like Intel the answers to my simple questions please?
I would be most appreciative, truly.
Thank you,
micro...
wavedreamer,
sorry for the late reply. I was traveling Wednesday and Thursday.
I have looked at the virtualization link you supplied.
The LynxSecure hypervisor appears to be quite robust.
One of the more interesting things about that link was looking at the LynxSecure software coupled with the ValidEdge MIS1100 appliance indicates that Makware cannot penetrate that system.
This is on the 4th diagram down.
That being the case, could this be used instead of Intel's TXT for the prevention of malware? It appears that way OR that there is an alternative solution at the least.
Am I correct in this based on the link?
http://www.lynuxworks.com/virtualization/secure-client-virtualization.php
TIA,
micro...
Tools and Utilities for V-Pro from Intel
http://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-1171
Activation tools
Management tools
Testing tools
All from Intel and a few from Microsoft.
Thanks again SL
As I have read these papers I continue to read that only one of the V-Pro capabilities states that it requires a TPM. That would be the TXT. The other things do not say that. A mere oversight maybe?
It seems that all these things must be enabled through the BIOS anyway, and yes, computer management is not the same as TPM management. No problem there at all.
Other papers have said that it stores keys on an Intel chipset, which resides on the mainboard. Is that chipset they are referring to also a tpm?
That's about it.
Again SL, Thank you.
micro...
Regarding V-Pro from Intel
http://www.intel.com/technology/vpro/index.htm?iid=tech_product+vpro
INTEL® VPRO™ TECHNOLOGY?¹
Maximized, hardware-assisted security and manageability
Managing and protecting desktops and laptops and securing data are among the great challenges for modern businesses. The 2nd generation Intel® Core™ vPro™ processor family with the hardware-based security and manageability of Intel® vPro™ technology simplifies and accelerates these critical IT functions.
Manage the PC virtually anywhere, anytime
Intel vPro technology is a set of security and manageability capabilities built into the 2nd generation Intel Core vPro processor family, Intel® chipsets, and network adapters.
With security and management features built into the hardware, Intel vPro technology:
* Accelerates data encryption/decryption using Intel® AES New Instructions (Intel® AES-NI)?, improving user productivity
* Significantly reduces unwanted access to sensitive data on missing laptops using Intel® Anti-Theft Technology (Intel® AT)?²
* Allows IT technicians to quickly deploy security patches across PCs, remotely unlock encrypted drives, and manage data security settings
* Gives IT help desk personnel complete control over a PC with features like KVM Remote Control?³
* Enables IT to remotely troubleshoot and repair PCs
Smart security and manageability on every chip
Embedded in hardware, Intel vPro technology capabilities are accessed and administered separate from the hard drive, OS, and software applications—in a pre-boot environment. This makes management less susceptible to issues affecting these areas and allows remote access to the PC regardless of the system's power state or OS condition. Key encryption components are kept in protected flash memory, separate from the data they protect, making it easier to secure and harder to penetrate and access sensitive information.
Reduce cost, improve security and ROI
IT departments spend much of their time and budgets on PC patching, troubleshooting and repair, software inventories, and maintenance, preventing them from addressing key issues and initiatives that can help the business be more efficient and grow. With Intel vPro technology, IT can:
* Reduce deskside visits by up to 56 percent‡
* Improve laptop inventories by up to 47 percent‡
* Accelerate patch saturation up to 56 percent faster‡
The 2nd generation Intel Core vPro processor family with Intel® Virtualization Technology (Intel® VT) enables hardware-based virtualization for PCs for centralized image management and administration, secure network storage, and out-of-band protection—all beyond the firewall.
With more users going mobile, complying with security regulations is more critical—and difficult—than ever. Intel vPro technology, along with PC management software, simplifies, helps automate, and improves laptop security with hardware-embedded technologies and remote control management.
Okay, so, does that phrase highlited in red mean that V-Pro technologies REQUIRE PC Management software, and, is that the same thing as TPM management software?
According to videos, keys are stored on an INtel chipset on the motherboard.
Here is a link to Intel Video that is worth looking at also:
http://www.intel.com/business/business-pc/demo/demo.htm
micro...
Sheldon,
Here is a question on one of the things you noted, and thank you for noting them!
•Strong Machine ID for Greater Security of OpenID: Wave will demonstrate strong, hardware-based authentication using OpenID to public sites that support OpenID credentials. As an OpenID credential is bound to the user’s PC, the user gains the ease of access of a universal single sign-on for account creation and persistent access to over 50,000 websites. No longer do users have to worry about multiple passwords, as their PC becomes the universal access token. By storing the private keys in hardware, Intel vPro technology ensures that the user’s identity cannot be stolen from his PC via malware or guest users. As OpenID continues to grow in use, the protection of the single sign-on credential with hardware will be paramount. Wave will demonstrate how OpenID credentials can be provisioned into the TPM on a vPro platform via the browser, using Wave’s Cloud-based, high-assurance OpenID provider, id.wave.com.
The area I put in bold relates to V-Pro specifically and its capabilities. My question I posed earlier was in essence does V-PRO REQUIRE tpm management software such as Wave's to accomplish the capabilities listed in the white papers, OR do the simply need a TPM on the system to be present so they can utilize hardened silicon for key storage and root of trust?
There is in my mind a BIG difference between the two and I hope you can see where I am coming from. Literally taking Intel's own words it reads that TXT requires a TPM, not a TPM PLUS a software TPM manager.
Is that something they simply left off inadvertantly?
That is what I am trying to ascertain.
I understand that the whole concept between getting as many TPM equipped business machines into the market is for enablng IT managers to be able to easily manage their network security and various protocols. That is fine and that is what ERAS is all about. Then we get into endpoints and mobile devices. Great.
However, the question remains whether INtel's TXT capability requires a TPM management software to be present on the computer aside from V-PRO's tools and a TPM.
I do hope I have made this clear. That is what has NOT been addressed. That is the underlying HOPE of all who are invested, including me, but as I READ what the paper actually says, it says a TPM is required. Does that mean V-PRO's TXTX can utilize that TPM by itself or does it need some additional TPM software?
Thank you in advance,
micro..
Thank you wavedreamer.
I have a question perhaps that may sound somewhat silly, but I believe that it might end some confusion.
On the Intel website regarding V-Pro, and TXT specifically because that is the only part of the several things Intel has put on its V-Pro that states that a TPM is necessary in order to use TXT, which is basically an anti-malware utility.
The question is the phrasing. Sheldon noted it and I went and read all the papers. A TPM is needed for Trusted Execution Technology.
Intel does not say that a TPM software manager is necessary or that a third party tpm software manager is necessary, but only that a TPM, a piece of hardened silicon, be present in order to be able to use the TXT feature of V-Pro version 2.0
Am I nit picking with their description by taking it at face value?
I would imagine the TPM is only needed to store keys in for the TXT to be able to have a trusted root. Does that mean a TPM managing software from a third party vendor must be utilized or does Intel not need that? That is the question and what is confusing.
Thank you in advance,
micro...
Thanks Sheldon!
Here is some
other interesting videos concerning V-Pro and TPM management:
CM
I have no idea what assertions you are talking about nor do I know anything about creating caricatures. You have expressed the view point that the government, in particular the DoD was looming and that meant something or was intimated strongly to bide good tidings for Wavx.
I know about the pace of government, Have sold to them for over 25 years now. In fact, I used to post about the slow pace of the federal government when I was a regular on this board before I was not.
Remarks are not limited if those tend to be the most dominate ones one makes. That aside, trusted computing is growing and certainly the federal government would be foolish not to something about their files which seem to leak worse than a sieve with large gaping holes in it.
At that point in time, the question will be Are TPMs still needed as a separate stand alone chip and is Wavx the only place to be able to manage interoperably and across platforms the required, hardened security.
DOES V=Pro really require a TPM? Is Intel promoting WAVE'S ESC?
I didn't read that. In fact, the paper I posted a link to from Intel said to use Bitlocker to manage the onboard security of the SandyBridge processor. None of those 34 pages said one word about Wave.
Now, that troubles me because I am a long time shareholder. I was told by the ceo that we had more business in hand to more than assure us of being profitable next quarter, only next quarter never came. That was about7 years ago.
So, all I am simply stating is that YOU have been a promoter of the relationship between WAVE and the Government. That is what your postings have alluded to.
Not saying anything else other than that.
Good day sir,
micro...
Go-Kite
You
must not have read. The DoD is going to explode this company. CM, AWK, all the old timers have said so. I hope they do it before I am dead and my children will be dividing up the wavx shares.
That word "EXECUTION" as it relates to a ceo is something rarely ever mentioned or discussed.
The one word that summarizes best this particular one is "demo".
Finalizing sales and getting large corporate repeat business, new SALES, doesn't seem to have traction, at least up to this point in time.
What I do have is plenty of "wait till next quarter's" and "wait till next year". We've had lots of those but plain old fashioned execution isn't a word I would associate at all with SKS.
Another burning question should be what is the real reason behind Intel purchasing McAfee with all McAfee's security knowledge as well as the knowledge of several other companies Intel has bought.
Wouldn't an all inclusive secured computer at the hardware level from ONE SOURCE possibly be a consideration?
I am just wondering out loud and even though it isn't a popular thing to wonder, being unpopular does not make it impracticable or impossible.
the best,
micro...
Hi Barge!
Well sir, here is a link to some pages from Intel on the V-Pro.
PLease read through them. Tell me what you think.
http://www.intel.com/assets/PDF/whitepaper/IntelCorevProWhitepaper.pdf
Thanks,
micro..
Barge
That is correct. However, mostly what you are referencing is an Intel motherboard design specifically for a socket 1155.
I read a week ago on INtel's white papers specifically that they had in print to use the microsoft bit locker to manage security features of that processor and tpm.
True, ESC is bundled but it was not being promoted by Intel on their papers. I don't know what that means if anything, but that is what I actually read.
micro...
Barge,
You are aware that not ALL core I-7 Intel processors are Sandy Bridge?
Right now, MOST are NOT. A couple are.
Those would be the 2600 series.
All the others are are not. Just thought I would point it out. The best way to know if what you got is Sandy Bridge is to read the info on the processor. It will say Sandy Bridge, just like it says Lynnfield or Bloomfield for example.
the best,
micro...