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.
When would Markman hearings take place? That's when Microsoft caved in and settled.
Wow! Disregard my last post, you answered the question. It is possible for SFOR to sue Singapore Telecom (which has $92 Billion in assets) for IP infringment. Whether that is probable is a whole different question.
This is great! It begs a question though. since Singapore Telecom (the largest telecom provider in Asia & 97% owner of Trustwave)
rolled out it's 2FA OOBA mobile banking service this Oct. on their "Cyber Day" would they perhaps be a possible SFOR IP infringer now or does the international patent have to have been granted and not just filed? I don't know international patent law?
Do you or anybody else reading this? Please inform. Thanks!
Yes I did, and it didn't surprise me. The reason IMHO is Beau "Bo" Dietel, who owns ACS is in the same computer security business as Rudy Giuliani. Bo is currently running to become mayor of NYC. Giuliani of course is a former mayor of NYC. Both men are among the elite of the Republican Party. So, it is within the realm of reality they talked "shop" over lunch at some function. Now granted, I'm reaching here, but all I'm saying is that it's possible because the circle of the NYC upper crust is relatively small and those people tend to know or at least know of one another IMHO. Finally, Giuliani might have read the letter I sent him as soon as then President-Elect Trump announced him as
his cyber-security advisor. Although I admit, that possibility is small.
POTUS is only one player, the ring master. Just take a look at all the interesting players that are participating in the development of the national "Anti-Hacking Plan". Do you really thing they are not going to implement changes in cyber security but allow things to stay as is?
papa p I believe we will grow a pair once there is enough of a revenue stream to guarentee more than just company survival but being able to pay for some modest expansion.
Bad decisions? SFOR survived to fight another day!
I am in perfect agreement with your statements "These are the kind of things a company has to do when in trouble" and "Mark Kay had to make decisions that were difficult and he made them". One must consider the timeframe those decisions were made. SFOR was, let's face it, just out of the coffin in the corporate graveyard.
Microsoft had almost bled it white and buried it when the settlement snatched victory out of the jaws of defeat and bankruptcy. At the time, SFOR was down to its last $35,000 from what I read. People moan & groan it was a bad deal. I look at it in the light we survived to thrive another day! Then Mark hitched our star to the very well connected ACS Federal vendor. Sure, it's a "beltway bandit" and we are relegated to being a flea on a big dog. Sorry folks, but that's how it works for small companies like SFOR inside the bubble of DC. IF ACS brings home the bacon with a deal of magnitude like the DHS, DOD or whatever alphabet agency, that 15% will not be chump change, it'll be a game changer for our little company. Shoring up SFOR's financial foundation enough to pursue further growth opportunities will be worth it IMHO.
Very nice indeed!
Gold49er, this is fantastic stuff! It confirms that cyber security is high on the priority list. Your DD has given me a rare commodity, hope. Thank you!
I just sent President Trump an e-mail about the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem. The Whitehouse.gov site has already been updated! I will follow-up my Priority Mail letter and e-mail with a phone call to the WH Opinion Line on Monday. That phone number is (202) 456-1111. Have a great weekend longs!
Dear Mr. Bossert,
Due to your depth and breadth of experience I was greatly encouraged to hear President Trump name you as his homeland security, counterterrorism and cybersecurity advisor. As a retired military intelligence officer and former HQ/EUCOM member, I was alarmed when I read EUCOM’s Lt/Gen Ben Hodges AFN interview in Poland during the NATO Operation Anaconda field exercise in June. In it he stated: “Neither (unclassified) radio communications nor email are secure” and “I assume everything I write on my BlackBerry is being monitored.” I believe he’s absolutely right! This COMSEC problem can become an OPSEC one with dire consequences in the near future by helping enable enemy targeteers to put munitions on American targets and troops, as I did to our country’s enemies as a targets intelligence officer.
As you are aware, our military is switching from Androids to the Chinese made I-Phone 6. These issue I-Phones have inadequate protection against hacking and exploitation by hostile intelligence services, exposing them to be found, targeted and killed, preventing mission success. Troops will soon deploy with these I-Phones.
Last winter I became concerned about protecting my personal information and financial information from hackers. I found out that the anti-virus programs out there fail to protect against the zero day attacks that key- loggers and click-jackers use. I wanted multi-layered defense and anti-screen capture capabilities. I read that “Silicon Review” recognizes Strike Force Technologies as the world’s leading provider of patented, military grade keystroke encryption, out of band authentication and 2 factor authentication. I purchased via Amazon and installed their Mobile Trust product on my mobile device. I also encouraged family and friends to do likewise.
Mobile Trust version 3 is now being sold in brick and mortar stores nationwide. It was easy to install, costs $30 a year for two I-phones, does not slow things down or cause any other problems. I did this only after Strike Force Technologies settled with Microsoft over patent infringement in January, 2016. In full disclosure I was so impressed with Mobile Trust that I even bought some SFOR stock. Please plan on getting our troops something to fix this tremendous COMSEC problem. I don’t even care if it’s Mobile Trust! They just need something better than the standard consumer encryption Apple provides its I-Phone 6. It is nowhere near the level of protection they need. View this as a serious chink in their armor to be filled before the next conflict.
The outgoing POTUS forwarded my letter to him, to the DOD/CIO office for action. The USCG up-channeled Mobile Trust to US Cyber Command for evaluation. However, no defensive software was provided our troops due to the Congressional budget impasse. With the recent passage of the 2017 DOD Appropriations Act, funds are finally available to do this. Please help! If I can be of any further service to you or our country in this matter please don’t hesitate to e-mail, call or mail me at: (contact info withheld).
Sincerely,
4Sleddogs
Major USAF Retired
Mailed to the WH this afternoon.
I'll need the occasional break from corresponding about SFOR or I risk terminal writer's cramp!
My fellow longs on the barricade, I must leave you for awhile and not post much in defense of SFOR. Time is short for me to write all 435 members of the US House of Representatives about the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem, Mobile Trust version 3. President Trump has directed that the "Anti-Hacking Plan" be on his desk in 90 days. Recommendations will be drafted for inclusion in the final weeks before submission. I desperately want America's best to have the best defensive software on their issue I-Phones. So, I shall raise the issue to all those who may have input on it. Wish me luck.
Don Quixote is resting from tilting (writing) 100 US Senators when Sancho comes running down from the crest of a nearby hill shouting. Don Quixote, Don Quixote I have found 435 more enormous giants for you to engage. They are called the House of Representatives. Don Quixote sighs knowing his quest is not done. He knows the new POTUS wants answers in 90 days to the hack attacks so there isn't much time to tilt at these windmills. He knows his old unit, EUCOM, has just reinforced the frontier of freedom in Eastern Europe with Lt/General Hodges' mobile brigades and his troops lack defensive software on their issue I-Phones.
Eastern Europe, the land of his grandmothers. It did not go well for his family the last time the Russians came. Their family farm was collectivized by force and one grandmother's niece put in a forced labor camp for being an "enemy of the people". Don Quixote is too old to stand shoulder to shoulder with this new generation of war fighters but he thinks he might be able to help them in some small way. He will tilt at all 435 windmills spreading the word of the potential SFOR solution to the military issue I-Phone COMSEC problem. For Don Quixote this is his last chance to help throw a punch in defense of democracy so he has resolved to do so with all his might! He must for his kin and their battle buddies now in uniform. "This is a good battle Sancho!" Cervantes
I like being up 8% scared then!
Thanks for that correction. Then tell me who would have been the ACS player clearing the way for Mark Kay our SFOR quarterback?
Optimist meet Pessimist!
Never doubt SFOR has competition. When I talked to the DOD/CIO's policy guy he told me the CIO had taken two briefings the previous week and one that week on solutions to the DOD mobile device COMSEC problem. He then said my call was good timing as he was scheduling others. Competition for those DOD dollars will be fierce! But, I believe SFOR's Mobile Trust, version 3 is the best cyber mousetrap out there. We'll have to wait to see if the DOD PhDs in IT agree or not. Until then I am long & strong SFOR!
Nah, on Monday morning join me in using the official send the President a message format found on the WH contact POTUS site.
Are you telling me a linebacker couldn't block & pave the way for an ACS quarterback running down field with the SFOR ball?
All I did was throw our quarterback, Mark Kay, a lateral pass. The ball is in his competent hands. If any yardage was gained it was due to the efforts of our linebacker ACS and him. All I can say is the last time I saw them they were running down the field. I do not know if they scored a touchdown or not. But, the game is not over yet. Long & Strong SFOR!
OMG! Beau "Bo" Dietel doesn't know I exist! He and I are not friends. He is the personal friend of President-Elect Donald J. Trump not me!
No dream, reality. Call Mark Kay to verify that my letter to the outgoing POTUS wound up on the DOD/CIO's desk within a week and that his policy guy (name withheld due to DOD Persec regulation)
called me expressing interest in Mobile Trust and a desire for a presentation on it. This info and the man's direct Pentagon phone number were given to Mark Kay who arranged the presentation to be given to the DOD/CIO by ACS. Mark told me he would verify this to any caller. No, I don't know how it went, I wasn't in the room. Mark also said he would show the original responses to my letters. Such as the one from Mr. Timothy M. Strickland USCG Chief of Business Operations Command, Control, Communications, Computing & Information Technology (C4IT) Service Center which says the following: "Together with U.S. Cyber Command and the Coast Guard Cyber Command, we're focusing significant attention on all aspects of our information technology investments. I appreciate the referral to products developed an offered by Strike Force Technologies. This information has been provided to our information technology and cyber security communities for evaluation" As you are aware US Cyber Command is a unified command. To ensure individual service branch and civilian agency input DISA would also have to review any IT. DISA does not hesitate to bring in the area expertise of MITRE at HAFB where I was stationed. That's how DOD evaluates software. Because the SBA initiated legislation to give American small business a chance to compete with the big defense contractors for a slice of the DOD budget pie passed and was signed into law in 2016 the Pentagon must abide by it.
IMHO It wouldn't work that way. IF any SFOR product description would ever appear on President Trump's desk they would be in bundled format being presented by a Federal Government distributor. Such as Alverez Associates or ACS. (which is owned by his personal friend, Beau "Bo" Dietel).
Two things I know happened. 1.) The DOD/CIO took a briefing on Mobile Trust version 3 by ACS and 2.) The USCG up channeled Mobile Trust to US Cyber Command for evaluation. What I don't know is if Mobile Trust made the grade. But at least it's getting a look by the PhDs in IT at US Cyber Command. Then, in accordance with DOD IT procurement policy DISA would have to evaluate Mobile Trust. Perhaps even MITRE might also take a look at it. What all this means is that SFOR is (in accordance with SBA initiated legislation) at least getting a chance at bat for a slice of the DOD budget pie. We should know with the release of the 2nd Q if SFOR struck out or hit a home run IMHO. That's because the recommendations in the "Anti-Hacking Plan" will be in the implementation phase. It is then that contractors & vendors should be selected.
Today at noon, Donald J. Trump will become our new Commander In Chief. On October 3, 2016 he delivered the following promise in his written remarks. "I will make certain that our military is the best in the world in both cyber offense and defense" Today starts the 90 day clock on when the "Anti-Hacking Plan" must be on his desk with its recommendations. That's one reason why I'm long & strong SFOR!
Bingo! You win the prize for connecting the dots between SFOR and its Federal Government distributors Advanced Cyber Services and Alverez Associates. "requirements written to point to a technology (not a specific vendor)". Your bottom line is spot on "SFOR will get licensing fees no matter the vendor" and never forget who owns ACS, Beau "Bo" Dietel who is very well connected.
My letter about Mobile Trust will be in the WH mail room when he steps in the door, LOL!
Obviously we are polarized on this issue. In time we are going to know whose right. President-Elect Trump has tasked the co-chairs of the "Anti-Hacking Plan" team to submit their report in 90 days. Protecting our military from hacking should be included in that report. Recommendations will be made as to which IT providers can help meet national objectives. I believe SFOR's Mobile Trust version 3 distributed by Federal Government Distributor Advanced Cyber Systems (ACS) or Alverez Associates may be of use in securing US military issue I-Phone 6s. You do not. It's as simple as that. Because the suspense date of the plan
falls in the 2nd quarter neither of us will know, with ANY certainty if ACS or Alverez was a chosen distributor or not until the 2nd Q report is released by SFOR. Can we at least agree on that?
Don't believe me? Go to the DISA site. You will see contracting listed under mission support. They would be the next hurdle for ANY defensive software vendor to leap before being able to participate in the RFP process.
Unless IMHO Singapore Telecom (97% owner of Trustwave) beats them to the punch! Hear me out. SingTel with $92 billion in assets could easily outbid Centrify. They rolled out their secure mobile banking service in Asia (as Asia's largest telecom provider) in Oct on Cyber Monday. Yes, it is 2-FA, OOBA (sounds familiar eh?)
If they scooped up SFOR (and the pending international patent) the entire world would be their oyster for that service. With Trustwave they already have a presence in the lucritive US market.
Makes sense to me. What about you?
No kidding! Who expected an award just because I sent Lt/Gen Ben Hodges a copy of Mobile Trust? Did I ever state that? Answer, No.
As far as the RFP is concerned you're forgetting something! That's DISA. If you are what you wrote, you would know that DISA would have to buy into any IT even before the vendor was ever offered a shot at the RFP. Mobile Trust went to US Cyber Command for evaluation. The next gate keeper (before an RFP is cut) would be DISA. You know that!
I appreciate the "armchair attorneys" like yourself who graciously share such illuminating DD and insights on the SFOR IP defense case.
Thanks for the heads-up! Please pass the link once it is made available.
No, "all the letters aren't work" since I am not being compensated in any way to write them. As far as "your goal isn't government contracts" I advise you to reread one of my letters. In it I clearly state "I don't even care if it's Mobile Trust. They (the troops) just need something better than just the standard encryption Apple provides it's I-Phone 6. It is nowhere near the level of protection they need" Yes, I write about Mobile Trust because that's what I use and know. However, if the PhDs in IT at MITRE, DISA or US Cyber Command determine that Mobile Trust doesn't meet their specs who am I to disagree with the experts? My bottom line is seeing the BEST defensive software being on the issue I-Phones of my kin & comrades before the next conflict, period. May the best software win!
We're in perfect agreement. Blank Rome would not have even taken the case on contingency unless they were confident of legal victory.
I agree, it is definitely within the realm of possibility.
I'll take the flip of the coin 50:50 odds any day!
Thank you for sharing that most informative post and reference.