How was Dr. Fraud not just as guilty as Stimpy? I could argue that he's more guilty as the entire illusion would have been less believable without his credentials and story telling.

An interesting contrast to the lies told by the previous management... my favorite was, "of course I can break AES-256".

100%

Dr Fraud returns!!!

Tell us about how you CLOK like copy is going with Stimpy! I'm sure plenty here would like to invest.

Double revenue...

2 * 0 = anyone? anyone? Yes, 0. They could quadruple it and it'd still be zero.

Of course they should. However, you can do it by putting in the work or you can do it buy buying something else. It's smoke and mirror accounting games.

No conflict of interest in this purchase at all... oh wait, there is.... a HUGE conflict of interest.

Two things are happening...
1. People are lining their pockets.
2. CLOK is buying revenue to make their financials look better.

Having links work... read that out loud. Links? Maybe that could be the next CLOK product. Links that work!

Microsegmentation. A.K.A. sharding. Same dog, same fleas.

Looks like they added the concept of access control. Revolutionary!

Impressive. They built a website with working links. It's clear that a massive deal with their encryption technology is just around the corner.

Why do you want news? Has ANY of the news, to date, really mattered?

Serious question - why do people think that another press release will change anything.

While I'm at it, if the tech is real, AQED is a threat to CLOK. Strong odds Dr. Fraud is using ideas he came up with at CLOK... likely the CLOK algo itself. On the other hand, if the tech isn't real...

Scammers gonna scam...

The real question is... why isn't the management team of CLOK doing anything about it? Are they not scanning for competitors? I'd bet anything that the 'tech' Stimpy and Dr. Fraud are using is 100% based on the same principles of CipherLoc. Dr. Fraud really only knows one trick and this is it.

Wow! .08 after a recent reverse split...

Brothers and Sisters - we are gathered here today to pay our respects to this brave yet abused stock. CLOK did not deserve this fate. The shareholders did not deserve this fate. Blood, tears and pennies were shed in order to enrich the likes of Dr. Fraud and his master Stimpy. Tragically, the new guardians were also unable to rescue this lost child and instead chose to abuse it. Such great hope existed... your potential flame was bright CLOK. May you Rest In Peace.

Can I get an AMEN?

Wow

His one true skill.

I'm not sure if others have offered 'encryption as a service'. That's a good question.

As for not needing new encryption... I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the CEO of the company essentially said that on the conference call.

That seems like an accurate description.

That was sarcasm.

To be fair, they sounded much much much better than MDLG (of course, is that really saying much?).

A few things I noted.

1. Chasteen was trying to make a case for the existence of CipherLoc but, in my opinion, made the case for it not being needed. Basically, he said the difference between the intelligence agencies that don't suffer hacks (as far as we know - my comment) and other agencies that do isn't their encryption. He indicated it was "tradecraft"... i.e. the intelligence agencies do things the right way and others don't. If that's the case, no encryption solution is going to help.

2. They are making a product to provide "encryption as a service". Consider this... you are some company and you decide you want to make use of this service. You have to send your data from wherever it is to the server that is providing the encryption service. If the idea is to protect your data with a better encryption... doesn't sending it to the server encrypted with an inferior encryption (if encrypted at all) defeat the entire purpose? Hint, the answer is yes.

3. They are talking about protecting databases. From what I could tell, they are only talking about encrypting that data as stored. This is essentially just file data and isn't any different than encrypting for other data at rest. Once the database loads any data from it will be kept in memory unencrypted. A hacker would have tools to look into memory and thus sidestep the encryption.

Just my .02 but it seems they don't actually understand what they are doing.

Just listened to the CC

It sounds like we finally have real management and an actual sales plan. This idea of providing 'encryption as a service' is probably the best idea any one there has ever had. This is a solid plan! Everybody hold your stock, we are all going to be R I C H

Time

I think 'Time' by Pink Floyd explains it all... specifically this part:

"And you run, and you run to catch up with the sun but it's sinking
Racing around to come up behind you again
The sun is the same in a relative way but you're older
Shorter of breath and one day closer to death"

That about says it all. The days pass but the only thing that really changes is how close this is to the end.

and the warrants?

Perhaps you can 'double up' when that happens.

Yet the company can't seem to sell the technology.

Why? Possible answers:
1. It doesn't work.
2. It works but no one wants it.
3. A long term history of completely incompetent leadership - you have to be really skilled to avoid sales this long if you have a viable technology.
4. A curse?

OK, I'll up my bid to $100. That's it... not a penny more.

That's $0.000000365/share. You should take my offer before the stock trades lower... just let me know who to send to wire to and for how many shares.

OK, I bid $10 for the tech

I'm pretty sure that having an NDA and thus non-public information and buying the stock could put a person on very thin ice with the SEC...

Yes...

The investors have been all had like a sorority girl passed from frat guy (CEO) to frat guy.

Lawyers aren't cheap... this is true. It also leads to two questions...

1. Why pay lawyers to only end up paying the guy that stole from the company nearly half a million dollars?

2. Why pay lawyers when the amount of money in the bank wasn't very high? This is especially true if you consider #1...

It was necessary to pay the lawyers in the beginning when MDLG was still trying to be the head clown in this circus. After that... why? Why was there never any mention of a forensic audit done after MDLG was gone? Many people are focused on getting the shares back (which is great). However, there are 'bodies' buried that could lead to the downfall of the company even if they were to actually grow revenue (not that it's going to happen).

This entire endeavor has been a long series of unfortunate and preventable events.

This is a great point...

If there are companies out there willing to use the tech... why can't CLOK get another company to issue a press release confirming this?

I believe there might have been a time when claims were made. As now, proof was requested... arguments were had and then... boom <proof>.

I know some of what is being said is true. Stands to reason, given the history, that it might all be true.

Buyer beware.

Why are we digging up dirt on anyone? This pig is cooked. If MDLG didn't go to jail no one is...

I have sincere questions...

* Why is Coby relevant? He's a sales guy that left the company...
* Why do you believe in the technology?
* What does it mean to be quantum ready?
* If it has been tested and retested, why is there no sales?
* Why do you think it has government approval?

Let's be realistic...

* The company is out of money
* The company is still being run by essentially the same board that allowed the cash to run out
* The current CEO has never had a conference call
* The company has been in testing with various entities essentially forever and that has not resulted in any real sales
* The most recent press release proves that they are talking out of both sides of their mouths (UDP vs TCP)
* No institutional money is going to come in on a new round of raising money. There is too much info out there now and those types of investors tend to research. They might raise money from individual investors but that's nickels and dimes.

Everyone is basically talking about a dead body...

Interesting use of capitalization...

Another thing about this poker analogy... if you steal from someone you are playing poker with you might get shot.

OK, there is a problem here. They are either playing games or idiots.

They state they completed successful testing with UDP and now want to do testing with TCP. There is no chance this would work with UDP other than sheer luck (or an incorrect test set up).

For this purpose, the primary difference between TCP and UDP is how they handle the situation where data is sent but not received.

In both cases, the data to send is broken into smaller pieces called packets. Those packets are given a number (so they can be reassembled) and then sent to the receiver. The reason they are given a number for reassembly is that each packet might follow a different route over the internet and that could result in packets showing up out of order or being lost. That last part is where we get to that primary difference.

In TCP, the packets received are ACK'd (an acknowledgment or receipt response sent back to the sender). If the ACK is not received the packet will be resent. Thus, it is said that TCP is guaranteed delivery.

In UDP, the packets are received without an ACK. Thus, it's very possible that a UDP packet won't be received. For the video game players amongst you, if you are player a first person shooter online and you see another player (or yourself) suddenly transported to an unexpected location then it's very likely UDP packets were lost.

OK, so why does this matter? Without having the entire encrypted message it can't be decrypted. Furthermore, if we assume we are living in a fantasy world and all the UDP packets will always show up then there would be no reason to test TCP.

Not sure... just some rumor I heard. :)

Isn't there something about an annual meeting in the corporate bylaws...

MDLG should be thanking God (with that capital G). Given how many laws he broke even a fairly mild sentence could have easily been a life sentence. He should donate some of the money to orphans or something.

Perhaps Chasteen is the smartest of the 'CEO Club'. He had enough sense not to hold a CC that would be filled with lies, half-truths and false promises.

Anyone know where I can get a job that will allow me to steal hand over fist and when I am caught they will give me a generous 6 figure parting bonus with no criminal concerns?

I'm just really happy...

That MDLG was brought up on criminal charges... makes all the spend on legal worth it. Oh wait... never mind.