Finallythere, "code compatibility" of Intel's WTPM and TrustZone.
First of all, the Intel Wireless Trust Platform Module needs to be broken up into three parts:
1) Wireless - this means mobile
2) Trust Platform - this means attested
3) Module - this means hardware enforced
It is TCG compliant as others have posted the links to Intel's documents that say supporting the TCG protocols, as well as Intel's WTPM whitepaper from last year that specifically mentions that in a round-about way.
So we have Intel with a mobile hardware trust platform that has been given a similar nomenclature, and is compatible with, the TCG protocols.
One step further, Intel works with Wave on the TCG discrete TPM solution for the PC platform. Wave's solution was chosen even though Intel got Infineon's solution for free with the hardware TPM chip. So there is a relationship there that clearly states Intel recognizes benefits from Wave solutions, not Infineon's, or they wouldn't have bought and bundled Wave's ETS/KTM/ESC with their PC trusted platforms.
Now figure in that Intel and Wave knows that the mobile devices based on this Xscale architecture need to be able to "talk" to the PCs, themselves, otherwise there would be no sharing of data between devices, you are reminded of why the Intel WTPM supports the TCG based TPM protocols.
Intel's Xscale chip is based on the ARM core that has TrustZone. TrustZone supports the Embassy firmware as per gugi and awk's prior posts. Intel uses Wave for everything else. So if TrustZone can use Embassy firmware, and TrustZone is compatible with the TCG TPM protocols, then one must *assume* that Intel's Xscale, based on the same architectural security core, could also use Wave's Embassy firmware. Now add into the pot the fact that Wave is chosen over a free solution for the TCG side of Intel's business, and one must *assume* that Intel would most likely also use Embassy firmware for their Xscale architecture to tie into the other TrustZone-based mobile devices and TCG discrete-TPM devices.
