Buy PM's
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.
Excellent and immensely Current ZPaul.
We know Blank Rome began using StrikeForce's Patented Technology years ago to Protect The Firm.
I hope the new CIO is as good a she says.
Lot's of Valuable Data there, especially the Clients Data.
Some times when Dicking with adding new hardware upgrades, you just add more holes, that will need to be discovered, one little Flaw that goes undetected, could mean Play Time for the hacker. If he finds it first.
Again I recommend reading the Cuckoo's Egg, at Berkley before the WWW.
There's a video of it online, but I don't recommend it. It's so short, so much is left out.
Even the synopsis below does not say how hacker Got into the system, or he'd give away the best part. I will say the Main Frame was a DEC/VAX.
At one point I had a DEC/VAX FARM of 98 DEC/VAX 11/750's Main Frames at the Cape.
Cut my teeth on them in the 80's, in Flight Simulation.
Enjoy......
For the past decade, I have had this notion that there must be a Cybersecurity Canon: a list of must-read books where the content is timeless, genuinely represents an aspect of the community that is true and precise and that, if not read, leaves a hole in cybersecurity professional’s education. I’ll be presenting on this topic at RSA 2014, and between now and then, I’d like to discuss a few of my early candidates for inclusion. I love a good argument, so feel free to let me know what you think.
The Cuckoo’s Egg: Tracking a Spy Through the Maze of Computer Espionage (1989) by Clifford Stoll
If you are a cybersecurity professional, you should have read this by now. More than 20 years after it was published, it still has something of value to say on persistent cybersecurity problems like information sharing, privacy versus security, cyber espionage and the intelligence dilemma.
Rereading it after 20 years, I was pleasantly surprised to learn how pertinent that story still is. And even if you are not a cybersecurity professional, you will still get a kick out of this book. It reads like a spy novel, and the main characters are quirky, smart, and delightful.
Looking Back
The Cuckoo’s Egg is my first love. Clifford Stoll published it in 1989, and the first time I read it, I devoured it over a weekend when I should have been writing my grad school thesis. It was my introduction to the security community and the idea that somebody had to protect these new-fangled gadgets called computers. Back in those days, authors put their email addresses in their books, and when I finished reading it, I sent Mr. Stoll a note explaining how much I enjoyed his book. He answered immediately and that forever made me a fan. But besides being a window back through time to the beginning of our modern Internet age, Stoll’s book highlights many of the security problems that still plague us today.
The story itself reads like an Alfred Hitchcock movie. Joe Average-Man — in this case, Stoll as a hippie-type systems administrator keeping the computers running at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory just outside San Francisco — is in the right place at the wrong time. Like Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart before him, Stoll is minding his own business when he stumbles upon a bit of a mystery that, when it all plays out, is much larger than he is. By tracking down a miniscule computer-accounting error, Stoll unraveled an outsourced, Russian-sponsored, international cyber-espionage ring that leveraged the Berkeley computers to break into US military and government systems across the United States.
The book documents Stoll’s journey as he tries to get help from the US and German governments to do something about this serious threat that nobody wants to own. As the story unfolds, the reader also gets a fascinating glimpse at how the Internet looked just before it exploded into the commercial, informational and cultural juggernaut that it has become today.
The interesting dichotomy at play in the book though is how Stoll deals with government authorities. In the book, he describes himself as a “mixed-bag of new-left, harmless non-ideology,” yet he routinely called, cajoled, and coordinated leaders and administrators in the NSA, the CIA, the FBI, and other government and military organizations–bastions of the near and far right. How Stoll gets his head around those two philosophies is fun to read.
It is these interactions with the government that Stoll runs squarely into one of those persistent problems that we still have in the security community today, and one we still talk about at each and every cybersecurity conference I attend.
The government does not like to share.
Stoll consistently ran into government bureaucracy: human-government vacuum cleaners who were eager to take any and all information that Stoll had in regard to his investigation but who were also unwilling to share anything that they knew in return. To be fair, the US government today is getting better at this information-sharing thing, but leaders are a long way from implementing a free-flowing information exchange. I am not sure it will ever get there. And as we’ve been discussing for months now here at Palo Alto Networks, what we’ve learned about what the government will share versus what data they will collect is going to continue to be a source of hand-wringing and also a catalyst for the increased use of techniques such as SSL/encryption.
There’s also the second persistent problem. As Stoll is wrapping up the book, he concludes, “After sliding down this Alice-in-Wonderland hole, I find the political left and right reconciled in their mutual dependency on computers. The right sees computer security as necessary to protect national secrets; my leftie friends worry about an invasion of their privacy.”
If that is not the perfect summation of the fallout from the Edward Snowden investigation, I don’t know what is. The Snowden case is just the last one in a series of privacy-versus-security trade-off debates that the United States and other countries have made in the past twenty years. As Bruce Schneier points out, this is a false argument: “The debate isn’t security versus privacy. It’s liberty versus control.”
He and other pundits highlight the fact that this is not an either-or decision. You can have security and privacy at the same time, but you have to work for it. In this book, Stoll was the first one I can remember who raised the issue. He struggled with it back then as we are all doing today.
The third persistent problem is the cyber espionage threat. The commercial world only really became aware of the issue when the Chinese government compromised Google at the end of 2009. The US military had been dealing with the Chinese cyber espionage threat, back then known as TITAN RAIN, for at least the decade before that. But Stoll claims that his book describes the first public case where spies used computers to conduct espionage, this time sponsored by the Russians. The events in The Cuckoo’s Egg started happening in August 1986, almost 15 years before TITAN RAIN, and some of the government characters that Stoll deals with in the book hint that they know about other nonpublic espionage activity that happened earlier than that. The point is that the cyber espionage threat has been around for some 30 years and shows no sign of going away any time soon.
The fourth and final persistent problem is really not a cyber problem at all but an intelligence discipline problem. Throughout the book, Stoll struggles with the idea of whether or not to publish his findings. He describes the problem like this:
“If you describe how to make a pipe bomb, the next kid that finds some charcoal and saltpeter will become a terrorist. Yet if you suppress the information, people won’t know the danger.”
That is the classic intelligence dilemma. It goes directly to the Snowden issue today wherein the lefties are concerned about privacy and want transparency for all security matters. The righties value security over privacy and worry that transparency will give too much information away to the bad guys. In my heart, I think there is some middle ground that could be reached. Since 9/11, the United States has swung in the direction of security over transparency. I do not see that changing anytime soon. Stoll definitely comes down on the side of transparency though, but like I said, he is a self-described “mixed-bag of new-left, harmless non-ideology.”
A Side Note
On 3 November 1988, 34 minutes after midnight and almost a year after Stoll concluded his forensics investigation on the Russian-sponsored cyber espionage ring, Robert Morris Jr. brought the Internet to its knees. He launched the first ever Internet worm, and for at least some days after, the Internet ceased to function as UNIX wizards of all stripes worked to eradicate the worm from their systems. Aside from the coincidental timing of the worm, the reason this is significant to this book is that Robert Morris’ father, Bob Morris Sr., was Stoll’s contact at the NSA during the investigation. He was one of those human vacuum cleaners taking in information but not giving any out. By all accounts, Bob Morris Sr. was a computer wizard in his own right and I have often speculated about how much his son picked up at the dinner table from his dad about the theoretical ways one might attack the Internet.
The Tech
The egg in The Cuckoo’s Egg title refers to how the hacker group compromised many of its victims. In turns out that the real-life cuckoo bird does not lay its eggs in its own nest. Instead, she waits for any kind of other bird to leave its nest unattended. The mother cuckoo then sneaks in, lays her egg in the unoccupied nest, and sneaks out, leaving her egg to be hatched by another mother. Similar to the cuckoo bird, Stoll’s hackers took advantage of a security vulnerability in the powerful and extensible GNU EMACs text-editor system that Berkeley had installed on all of its UNIX machines. As Stoll said, “The survival of cuckoo chicks depends on the ignorance of other species.”
The spy ring spent a lot of time trying to take over regular user accounts so that they could log in as those users and review the system without causing alarm. In one instant, after becoming a system administrator with the EMACs attack, one hacker opened up the system’s password file. He still did not know what the passwords were to all the users on the system because they were encrypted. Instead of trying to break them, he just erased one of them. He picked a specific user and erased the user’s password. When he logged in as that user later, the system would grant access since there was no password guarding the account.
After a while, the hacker started downloading the entire password file to his home computer. Stoll later discovered that the hacker executed a brilliant new attack. He encrypted every word in the dictionary with the same algorithm that encrypted passwords and compared the encrypted passwords in the downloaded password file with the encrypted dictionary words. If he found any that matched, he could now log in as a legitimate user. Brute-force dictionary attacks are standard today, but back then, this was a new idea.
Decades Later
I can’t tell you how pleased I am that The Cuckoo’s Egg still holds up after 20 years. Being my first love and all, the old girl has aged quite well. Instead of playing Jimmy Stewart or Cary Grant in an old black-and-white favorite movie, Stoll fits quite nicely in a modern setting. The book still has something of value to say on persistent cyber security problems like information sharing, privacy versus security or liberty versus control,cyber espionage, and the intelligence dilemma. This book is part of the canon for the cyber security professional. You should have read this by now
In the begining, I have to go with it, it's the Midnight Shift Theme song.
RDY2ROCK & Sleddogs
I've Been looking for months for this card.
It was 6, 7, 8 years ago I attended NETWORK + INTEROP convention.
That one year they Passes to purchase to INTEROP After Dark, a chance to have peer to peer meeting with others at a TV Themed Sports Bar.
While there I ran into a gentleman, who worked for MITRE. We instantly hit it off when I mention I worked at the ROCC and for CSR. He had been the manager of CSR's Telemetry site in Antigua.
Even after 7 or 8 years, we have a connection he will remember, CSR.
It can't hurt to write him and see if he knows anything.
But again it is MITRE. Tight Lipped is the SOP.
NRO.ic. gov
The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) is a joint Department of Defense (DoD)-Intelligence Community (IC) organization responsible for developing, launching, and operating America's signals, imagery, and communications satellites.
Great Quote CyberC
But where is that quote located ?
Did I miss it ?
A fluff PR means nothing,
Unless some meat can be included.
Updates are as close as one is going to get, until a PR release of the Deals are able to be released.
Thank You Mark for not putting out Fluff PR's and keeping Shareholders abreast of how things are going.
In an interview late last year Mark stated that ACS will be paying the $9M owed to SFR when some Deals are Completed, so we won't be waiting until 2020.
So looking forward to the end of the year we have
Deals
Revenues
$9M
And anything can happen on the Litigation front, any day. That can mean today or next year.
Patience, we know some of what's coming, we just don't know when it will come during the 2nd half of year. I hope Christmas will comes early, but I am content to wait.
We can see some of the Deals by looking at the websites of the Companies involved.
We can gather more info by reviewing the 1st ACS webinar.
My feeling is, the news about deals, Etc. by the EOY, when released, will be better than what we can see imo.
I would review the ZPAUL Posts after the Webinar.
Also all those People did not just happen to be in attendance and view that Webinar. Somehow they were there with intent, how did they all know about it and want to attend ?
I have my own Ideas about that, but it's just speculation. But something had them in attendance.
We have all seen the list, here are a few below,, and I submit these type people/Companies don't just happen to attend a Webinar put on by an unknown little company. Ummm how did they find out about it and then want to be in attendance ?
IMO there's far more going on than what we know.
Rebecca lloyd
Head of Philanthropy
Prince of wales's charitable Foundation
United Kingdom
princeofwalescharitablefoundation.org.uk
Erik Zakrzewski
Sr. IT Security Analyst
Oracle
Virginia, United States
oracle.com
Moussa ARAB
Senior Consultant
Dubai Media Incorporated
United Arab Emirates
dmi.gov.ae
dubai.ae
Freda Painter
ISO- International Organization for Standardization
West Virginia, United States
iso.org
Waqas Mehboob
Cyber Security Engineer
DEWA
United Arab Emirates
dewa.gov.ae
William Towe II
Endpoint Security Architect
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Texas, United States
stlouisfed.org
Christina Garcia
Director Software Engineering
Capital One
Illinois, United States
capitalone.com
Nick Tannin
Aetna
Connecticut, United States
aetna.com
Christopher Brown
Chief information security officer
Chicago Stock Exchange
Illinois, United States
chx.com
Maureen Johnson
Cybersecurity Engineer
Harris Corporation
Maryland, United States
harris.com
John Artman
Director of Crisis Management
Mastercard
Missouri, United States
mastercard.us
Katie Bacon
IMF-International Monetary Fund
District of Columbia, United States
imf.org
Larry Brennan
Vp of merchant PCI compliance
BAMS
Virginia, United States
bams.com
David Deane
security
HP
Australia
www8.hp.com
John Artman
Director of Crisis Management
Mastercard
Missouri, United States
mastercard.us
Annie Wong
Business Audit Supervisor
Ford Motor Company
Michigan, United States
ford.com
Larry Marshall
Caesars Entertainment
Nevada, United States
caesars.com
Sam Penn
Ford Motor Company
Michigan, United States
ford.com
What about the Raritan Center Gorilla?
He wears the Gold Chain with the MFA Initials.
He doesn't get much respect for a Mutter Fuc_in Ape.
He escaped from The LA Zoo about a year ago, and I hear he's getting Divorced.
He Hasn't been to work in weeks, that's why there's no security, he laying low at the L'Ermitage, of course. He also having a hard time adjusting to the new Culture in society, and has been going through transactional analysis.
I hope he gives me back my BMW.
Oh Did I say ACS True Key ?
No no no, so sorry.
I'm sorry, imo True Key is based off of Ram's Out-Of-Band MFA Patents, what am I thinking !
Yes after months of DD, I finally found where INTEL is using Out-of-Band MFA. If it's in True Key, then OOB MFA is what's INSIDE.
Yes Months, trying to find out that the Multifactor Authentication INTEL utilizes is Out-Of-Band? The Million Dollar Question finally Answered.
Will StrikeForce go after INTEL as an Infriger ? Not likely at all :
1. ACS is an INTEL Partner.
2. ACS is integrated into McAffee's DXL.
McAffee is owned by TPG 51% & INTEL 49%.
3. Ropes & Gray are TPG's goto Law Firm for M&A and Litigation.
4. Ropes & Gray is representing StrikeForce in Several Litigations.
With all that, I don't see StrikeForce ever calling Intel an Infriger, IMO.
And if Intel is using OOB MFA And is not an Infriger ?
Well perhaps some here know the rest of the Story then.
At least IMO, there is one Obvious Answer given all those Relationships.
If Intel and McAffee were possible Infringers ............
How might Rope & Gray Phrase it ??? Conflict of Interest.
Both TPG/McAfee and INTEL Sell the True Key Product.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://b.tkassets.com/shared/TrueKey-SecurityWhitePaper-v2.0-EN.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwi80syY35rVAhUKQyYKHZ9BAykQFggmMAA&usg=AFQjCNFte01S0N_k53PRME9gcNcMA38i0w
Re: "That's Strikeforce's twitter not CV's."
I said it was on CV's Twitter and the link I posted.
I would hate for someone to strain themshelves scrolling Down to April 7th of the CV Twitter.
Like I said,
Then not putting effort into it.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=133148638&txt2find=CV
Scroll to April 7th
https://twitter.com/corp_vision?lang=en
Well you know what they say, "You can lead a Horse to Water"
Oh yeah, you mean COBAS Out-Of-Band
Well you did ask the question, the difinitive answer was Obvious.
ACS TRUEKEY INSIDE INTEL 7th GEN Microprocessors
This is where I began this StrikeForce Adventure, hoping to see SFOR Patents Emmbeded INSIDE INTEL'S Microprocessors.
Now That's what I'm talking about ZPaul
Now to work on the Type of MFA that's INSIDE !
Patents by Inventor Ram Pemmaraju
Ram Pemmaraju has filed for patents to protect the following inventions. This listing includes patent applications that are pending as well as patents that have already been granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
MULTICHANNEL DEVICE UTILIZING A CENTRALIZED OUT-OF-BAND AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM (COBAS)
Publication number: 20170006040
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Application
Filed: April 1, 2016
Publication date: January 5, 2017
Inventor: Ram PEMMARAJU
Method and apparatus for securing keystrokes from being intercepted between the keyboard and a browser
Patent number: 8973107
Abstract: The invention described herein provides a method and system for foiling a keylogger by creating a custom keyboard driver and passing the keystrokes directly to the browser in an encrypted format. The browser (which is used to access the Internet) has a component that decrypts the keystroke before it is sent to the website. Thus the present invention enables the user to go to any website and enter sensitive information (passwords, credit card numbers, etc.) without the keystrokes being intercepted by Keyloggers. In general terms, the invention described herein provides a method and system for (1) modifying the keyboard driver, (2) encrypting the keystrokes between the keyboard driver and the browser, and (3) notifying the user if the invention has been compromised.
Type: Grant
Filed: May 16, 2014
Date of Patent: March 3, 2015
Assignee: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING USER INPUT IN A MOBILE DEVICE
Publication number: 20140281549
Abstract: The present invention secures user data throughout its lifecycle—(1) when entering data into the mobile device, (2) when storing the data in the mobile device, and (3) when transmitting data from the mobile device. In accordance with a first aspect of the invention, the invention features a methodology for encrypting and passing the keystrokes to the application in an encrypted format. In accordance with a second aspect of the invention, the invention features a methodology to store data in a vault in an encrypted form and launch an application with the data from the vault. In accordance with a third aspect of the invention, the invention features a methodology to transmit data from the mobile device to an external application securely.
Type: Application
Filed: March 15, 2014
Publication date: September 18, 2014
Applicant: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING KEYSTROKES FROM BEING INTERCEPTED BETWEEN THE KEYBOARD AND A BROWSER
Publication number: 20140250307
Abstract: The invention described herein provides a method and system for foiling a keylogger by creating a custom keyboard driver and passing the keystrokes directly to the browser in an encrypted format. The browser (which is used to access the Internet) has a component that decrypts the keystroke before it is sent to the website. Thus the present invention enables the user to go to any website and enter sensitive information (passwords, credit card numbers, etc.) without the keystrokes being intercepted by Keyloggers. In general terms, the invention described herein provides a method and system for (1) modifying the keyboard driver, (2) encrypting the keystrokes between the keyboard driver and the browser, and (3) notifying the user if the invention has been compromised.
Type: Application
Filed: May 16, 2014
Publication date: September 4, 2014
Applicant: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram PEMMARAJU
Methods and apparatus for securing keystrokes from being intercepted between the keyboard and a browser
Patent number: 8732483
Abstract: The invention described herein provides a method and system for foiling a keylogger by creating a custom keyboard driver and passing the keystrokes directly to the browser in an encrypted format. The browser (which is used to access the Internet) has a component that decrypts the keystroke before it is sent to the website. Thus the present invention enables the user to go to any website and enter sensitive information (passwords, credit card numbers, etc.) without the keystrokes being intercepted by Keyloggers. In general terms, the invention described herein provides a method and system for (1) modifying the keyboard driver, (2) encrypting the keystrokes between the keyboard driver and the browser, and (3) notifying the user if the invention has been compromised.
Type: Grant
Filed: October 8, 2013
Date of Patent: May 20, 2014
Assignee: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Multichannel device utilizing a centralized out-of-band authentication system (COBAS)
Patent number: 8713701
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Grant
Filed: March 15, 2013
Date of Patent: April 29, 2014
Assignee: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
MULTICHANNEL DEVICE UTILIZING A CENTRALIZED OUT-OF-BAND AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM (COBAS)
Publication number: 20140109203
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Application
Filed: October 17, 2013
Publication date: April 17, 2014
Applicant: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram PEMMARAJU
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR SECURING KEYSTROKES FROM BEING INTERCEPTED BETWEEN THE KEYBOARD AND A BROWSER
Publication number: 20140040635
Abstract: The invention described herein provides a method and system for foiling a keylogger by creating a custom keyboard driver and passing the keystrokes directly to the browser in an encrypted format. The browser (which is used to access the Internet) has a component that decrypts the keystroke before it is sent to the website. Thus the present invention enables the user to go to any website and enter sensitive information (passwords, credit card numbers, etc.) without the keystrokes being intercepted by Keyloggers. In general terms, the invention described herein provides a method and system for (1) modifying the keyboard driver, (2) encrypting the keystrokes between the keyboard driver and the browser, and (3) notifying the user if the invention has been compromised.
Type: Application
Filed: October 8, 2013
Publication date: February 6, 2014
Applicant: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram PEMMARAJU
Methods and apparatus for securing keystrokes from being intercepted between the keyboard and a browser
Patent number: 8566608
Abstract: The invention described herein provides a method and system for foiling a keylogger by creating a custom keyboard driver and passing the keystrokes directly to the browser in an encrypted format. The browser (which is used to access the Internet) has a component that decrypts the keystroke before it is sent to the website. Thus the present invention enables the user to go to any website and enter sensitive information (passwords, credit card numbers, etc.) without the keystrokes being intercepted by Keyloggers. In general terms, the invention described herein provides a method and system for (1) modifying the keyboard driver, (2) encrypting the keystrokes between the keyboard driver and the browser, and (3) notifying the user if the invention has been compromised.
Type: Grant
Filed: January 22, 2007
Date of Patent: October 22, 2013
Assignee: Strikeforce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Multichannel device utilizing a centralized out-of-band authentication system (COBAS)
Patent number: 8484698
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Grant
Filed: December 1, 2010
Date of Patent: July 9, 2013
Assignee: StrikeForce Technologies, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
MULTICHANNEL DEVICE UTILIZING A CENTRALIZED OUT-OF-BAND AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM (COBAS)
Publication number: 20130096916
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Application
Filed: December 1, 2010
Publication date: April 18, 2013
Applicant: NETLABS.COM, INC.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Multichannel device utilizing a centralized out-of-band authentication system (COBAS)
Patent number: 7870599
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Grant
Filed: October 21, 2004
Date of Patent: January 11, 2011
Assignee: Netlabs.com, Inc.
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Multichannel device utilizing a centralized out-of-band authentication system (COBAS)
Publication number: 20060041755
Abstract: A multichannel security system is disclosed, which system is for granting and denying access to a host computer in response to a demand from an access-seeking individual and computer. The access-seeker has a peripheral device operative within an authentication channel to communicate with the security system. The access-seeker initially presents identification and password data over an access channel which is intercepted and transmitted to the security computer. The security computer then communicates with the access-seeker. A biometric analyzer—a voice or fingerprint recognition device—operates upon instructions from the authentication program to analyze the monitored parameter of the individual. In the security computer, a comparator matches the biometric sample with stored data, and, upon obtaining a match, provides authentication. The security computer instructs the host computer to grant access and communicates the same to the access-seeker, whereupon access is initiated over the access channel.
Type: Application
Filed: October 21, 2004
Publication date: February 23, 2006
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Methods and apparatus for a computer network firewall which can be configured dynamically via an authentication mechanism
Publication number: 20030233582
Abstract: This invention provides a improved computer network firewall that includes one or more features for increased security. A firewall in accordance with the invention can be configured with rules being added and removed by a firewall controller. Dynamic rules may be used in addition to pre-loaded access rules. A firewall client on a user's computer is used to “logon” to the firewall controller and after being authenticated by it, can access the firewall.
Type: Application
Filed: April 4, 2003
Publication date: December 18, 2003
Inventor: Ram Pemmaraju
Inventors Ram Pemmaraju
Original Assignee Strikeforce Technologies, Inc.
Export Citation BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
Patent Citations (11), Referenced by (2), Classifications (10), Legal Events (2)
External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet
Cybersecurity: While Goals Are Ambitious, Timelines Are Tight
Ropes & Gray
Trump Issues First Executive Order on Cybersecurity: While Goals Are Ambitious, Timelines Are Tight
May 16, 2017
https://www.ropesgray.com/newsroom/alerts/2017/05/Trump-Issues-First-Executive-Order-on-Cybersecurity-While-Goals-Are-Ambitious-Timelines-are-Tight.aspx
Ropes & Gray, China’s New Cybersecurity Law Part#1
Wild Bill takes his Poker Seriously longboard !
Reminds me of Jack The Toad
https://www.ropesgray.com/newsroom/alerts/2017/07/Security-Whos-Regulated-Under-the-New-PRC-Cybersecurity-Law-An-In-Depth-Examination.aspx
Perspective-Ropes & Gray was founded in 1865
I think they have been around the block and the Bench a few times by now.
In 2016, Ropes & Gray was ranked 13th on the AmLaw 100, which ranks firms by gross revenue.
1865:
January 13 – American Civil War: The Second Battle of Fort Fisher begins when United States forces launch a major amphibious assault against the Confederate stronghold of Fort Fisher, North Carolina.
January 31 – American Civil War: Confederate General Robert E. Lee becomes general-in-chief.
March 4 – U.S. President Abraham Lincoln is inaugurated for a second term; Andrew Johnson becomes Vice President.
March 18 – American Civil War: The Congress of the Confederate States of America adjourns for the last time.
April 9 – American Civil War: General Robert E. Lee surrenders to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, effectively ending the American Civil War.
April 15 – Inauguration of Andrew Johnson: President Lincoln dies of his gunshot wound early this morning and Vice President Andrew Johnson becomes the 17th President of the United States.
July 5 – The U.S. Secret Service is founded.
July 21 – Wild Bill Hickok – Davis Tutt shootout: In the market square of Springfield, Missouri, Wild Bill Hickok shoots Little Dave Tutt dead over a poker debt in what is regarded as the first true western "fast draw" showdown.
Re: LOL "Rs and dillution very likely if things dont happen very soon"
Just Rumors, Propaganda, Scare Tactics, as a posed to the Facts.
Where have you been ? Things have already happened !
Kay - "We definitely have deals already done"
We have and will have enough money for the company not to have to worry about it.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=130537560
A Rocket Ride within the scale of the PPS.
Re: "I'm not seeing it"
Then not putting effort into it.
EXCITING NEWS! Mark L. Kay from #StrikeForceTechnologies received the 2017 Software and Technology Innovation award from @Corp_Vision! pic.twitter.com/qlAQPKsRCz
— Zerify (@ZerifyOfficial) April 7, 2017
No matter what, R&G are a Preeminent Global Law Firm.
ALthough I've seen that 43-0 Number thrown about, I still have never seen it in REAL PRINT or quoted.
The ZPaul Jumpshare Express was Great today all 74 pages of it.
Especially :
B. The Patent Office Has Already Considered and Rejected Arguments Similar to Those in the Petition
The ’698 patent claims priority to U.S. Patent No. 7,870,599 (“’599 patent”), which itself claims priority to U.S. Appl. No. 09/655,297 (“’297 Appl.”). The ’698 patent and its parent applications underwent extensive examination—with a total of 18 office actions and responses, including a PTO Appeal Brief—spanning nearly 13 years at the Patent Office.
During this time, the Patent Office confirmed the patentability of the ’599 patent during its initial prosecution (Ex. 1008 at 37), re-confirmed the patentability of the ’599 patent during Ex Parte Reexamination
and allowed 7 additional claims (Ex. 1009 at 8), and confirmed the patentability of the ’698 patent (Ex. 1007 at 38). In fact, in its final Office Action prior to allowance of the ’698 patent, the Patent Office not only withdrew all of its § 103 rejections, but it also allowed Applicant to add 7 additional claims. Ex. 1007 at 73.
There were 4 replies to my post. RETRO
Yours was the only one that made it. LOL
TIME to Go RETRO
Isn't it interesting SFOR still holds the line a a penny ..?.
We have heard it's headed to the trips again, or .008.. the first half of the year. As SFOR holds the line while we await Deals and Revenue.
It's a long way from this time last year after the PPS began to rise out of the trips.
So I guess you will also say SFOR HAS NO
Connection with IBM too ?
Really folks, these people have no clue.
SFOR is not out there on its own as a one man band,
Remember the Channel Partners, each are pushing SFOR Patents in their own way deeper into this Industry.
Although I will admit, ACS is doing a great job on Lead Guitar.
RDY2ROCK - SFOR PATENTS and IBM WORK TOGTHER
I guess you can say They Got Seoul .
RDY2ROCK, Now their trying to knock any connection ZP may be trying to show peps with another Major player.
Big Blue is what many of us call IBM IRON.
Most banks use IBM. But then you'll have to ask the resident bank expert and FFEIC Guidance Guru.
As I only worked at the Rocket Patch.
I just know IBM is working with one of StrikeForce's Channel Partners and StrikeForce's Encyption Patent.
It's good enough for me to know that SFOR Channel Partners keep getting in Bed with Major Players such as McAffee, Intel, IBM.
SFOR Patents seem to keep inching their way into gaining the attention of the Big Boys, however the SFOR Business Plan is getting it executed.
49'er
Re:"doubt SFOR would go after IBM"
Neen, it's been stated that SFOR will go after Google.
So IBM's Watson will meet Ropes & Gray.
SFOR went after Microsoft $574B Market Cap
IBM $148B Market Cap
Google $673B Market Cap
Re:"doubt SFOR would go after IBM"
Neen, it been stated that SFOR will go after Google.
So IBM's Watson will meet Ropes & Gray.
SFOR went after Microsoft $574B Market Cap
IBM $148B Market Cap
Google $673B Market Cap
Kinda brings meaning to Major Major Deals, Right!
ZPAUL still bringing the Real Points to Light !
Over 750 million endpoints
378 million total endpoints
86 million corporate endpoints
292 million consumer endpoints
112,000 corporate customers
190+ countries
84% of Fortune 100 Firms
65% of Fortune 500 Firms
67% of Global 2000 Firms
85% of world’s largest banks
64% of Global Top 50 Retailers
"McAfee and ACS JOIN Forces", Excellent!
Best evidence yet of the McAffee / ACS Close Connection!
Thanks For the link ZPaul and Great Post.
Link to Screen Capture below.
http://jmp.sh/lp70xvu
Post
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=133046054
Kay - "We definitely have deals already done"
That Post does not conform to reliable information.
ZPaul Monday, April 17, 2017 4:37:15 PM
Re: Mombajack post# 155534
Post # 155540 of 172985 Go
I like it 2 "deals already done" / "We have and will have enough money" in todays email from Kay @ https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=130537560
Quote:
We definitely have deals already done and should pay over the next half of a year. The 1st qtr will be ok, but nothing special since the deals on the table are large, as you know, and won't pay till the second half of this year and then will be bigger than expected hopefully. Also anything can happen with our patents any day.
We have and will have enough money for the company not to have to worry about it.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/replies.aspx?msg=130547325
A voice of Reason
From a world that is in Kaos, S. Korea
God Bless and stay safe RDT2ROCK.
Re: "When can he talk about them?"
Thanks Z, updated my group with The Tweet.
Which was Prompted by an investor writing Kay saying Other CEO's keep him abreast of what's going on via Tweets.
"We expect a very exciting year!"
Steady as she goes.
First Data - 2800 Transaction per Second ! $2.2 Trillion per Year
160,000 per Minute
10,080,000 Per Hour
241,920,000 Per Day
7,257,600,000 Per Month
87,091,200,000 Transactions Per Year.
With a Penny Royalty per Transaction that's $870,970 a year minus the ACS cut.
Would be nice, if that's how it worked. That's just one customer.
The company’s 24,000 owner-associates are dedicated to helping companies, from start-ups to the world’s largest corporations.
And TPG is just Full of Surprises
First Data Former Parent of:
One step at a time
Looking to Touche' Silver first $0.10
"Crap Shoot !" ?
Perhaps some have thought about it.
But Please dont repeat, we don't want any harm to come to you.
Re: Mark's Tweet
Ummmmm I Wonder what inspired him to Tweet that Today ?
Maybe he just got some last night and was in a good Mood.
OR _____ _____ _____ ____ ______ !
That 1 Company and product someone wanted
StrikeForce is suing Germalto for using OOB, in a few Products.
One of them happens to be for Infringment on using OOB in transmission of PUSH Notifications and also in MFA products.
Again Companies can have all the Push Notifications they want, as long as they are not using OOB to get the notification to and from the User. Otherise they are Infringing on SFOR's Patents.
Another type of Push Notification that does not infringe is depicted below.
Germalto is infringing on SFOR' OOB Patents for using it in their (SAS / MobilePASS+ , as well in Germalto OOB/MFA products SafeNet Authentication Service, Ezio Suite, and MobileID.
"5 GEMALTO INFRINGING PRODUCTS 18.Upon information and belief, Gemalto offers two-factor authentication products for use on Android and iOS devices in the United States and in this District. These products include, but are not limited to, SafeNet Authentication Service, Ezio Suite, and MobileID.19. Upon information and belief, Gemalto’s SafeNet Authentication Service (“SAS”) (using, for example, MobilePASS+) utilizes out-of-band (“OOB”) technology that sends a notification to the user’s device when a login request is made to provide two-factor authentication with a mobile phone. SAS can be used with RADIUS or SAML servers for receiving and authenticating requests for access to computers, including web applications. When a user wants to access a protected application, the user’s request is redirected to SAS, which sends a push notification out-of-band to the user’s mobile device requesting authorization. When the push notification arrives on the user’s mobile device, the user can respond to the request directly on the push notification, or tap on the notification to load additional request details within the MobilePASS+ application and/or tap to approve the login request, or log in using a fingerprint sensor.
https://jumpshare.com/v/xWX4bQN3x3Qg1RZPLySA
Non-Infringing Push Noification
How many times does one have to be Corrected?
That's Severe Static, To be correct.
2020 Time Period paid possibly this year.
Kay stated in an Interview late last year that ACS would be paying the $9M after a few Good Contracts. So that $9.M may hit the SFOR books later this year.