InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 31
Posts 1459
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/08/2012

Re: anEmptyBottle post# 171676

Tuesday, 07/04/2017 9:33:03 AM

Tuesday, July 04, 2017 9:33:03 AM

Post# of 235042
Yeah, the way he links his DD

You can't tell which Revision it is refering to.

At least I gave the screen shots showing MFA was not a requirment in 2006.

I'm not concerned about the past. Now with PCI, NIST, Etc, requiring OOBA and their requirements must begin to be followed in 2018 it's all down hill.

We have the preeminent Law Firms to take on the task.

But in the mean time SFOR is getting deals Done dispite the Infringers, as long as SFOR continues to get Major Players the Revenues will follow.

Besides when I mention standard, I'm discussing a Technical Standard, not the FEEIC standard, with a bunch of rules to go by, called guidance/standard. The FEEIC can not make a Technology a Standard.

OOBA became a Default Standard when Microsoft took the ball and ran with it "around the World.

It's up to R&G and BR to prove that COBAS is the one and only flavor .

These people keep claiming there are other OOB MFA forms out there, but no matter how many times you ask them to show the Patents that Pre-date Ram Pemmaraju's Patents, you hear silence.

Thanks for taking an interest, and voicing an opinion on the matter
anEmptyBottle

anemptypipe, Time to head to Las Vegas for a Comped Suite.
___49'er