Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[go-kitesurf]

I know you didn't dig space, but that wasn't your original argument. You said the NTRU TSS was interoperable and therefore Wave was trumped. That is hogwash! Let me once again illustrate why you are incorrect and now attempting to sound correct by changing the subject. (and there are numerous of your posts to show you if you refute this claim, so don't bother)

The TPM talks to the TSS. The TSS talks to the CSP.

On the other end of the model, the end user side, there is going to be all these TPM management and TPM utility and TPM utilization software packages out there being developed. They ALL need to talk to a CAPI layer. The CAPI layer talks to the CSP. The CSP is the central "portal" to the TSS and the TPM.

There is NO way around it. So the TSS can make coffee and turn tricks for $20, it doesn't matter. THE CSP MUST BE INTEROPERABLE for any TSS to work with any other chip.

Refer to this diagram I altered specifically for your eyes:



The peach shaded areas are all vendor supplied. There is no way to go around a layer. In other words, the CSP doesn't talk to the TPM directly. The pink areas above, are services specific (Microsoft will have a CAPI called MS CAPI. Apple will have one, Im sure. So will Linux.) All of these need to communicate with the CSP to get the job done for whatever application was written for that operating system.

So, your argument that NTRU is more pivotal than Wave makes no sense if you UNDERSTOOD the space as you claim to.

The CSP is the "gate" to the TPM and TSS. Without the interoperability of a CSP, you don't get the interoperability of the TSS.

So why would Wave develop a TSS when they have a CSP? They can license the CSP to many more people than they could the TSS. Personally, I like Wave's model right now and I think that even if you read this post ten times you still would not get it.