InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 31
Posts 4170
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 11/11/2003

Re: junct8/9 post# 88564

Wednesday, 07/27/2005 2:38:50 PM

Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:38:50 PM

Post# of 249241
junct8/9, uhh ...

I believe your question belies a certain misunderstanding regarding the nexus of interoperability. You state : “other interoperable TPM” which is in some regards nonsensical.

The TPM is a hardware device that must meet certain criteria under the 1.2 specification to be TCG compliant. The TPM is driven by a kernel mode TDD (TPM device driver). The TDD interacts with the TDDL (TDD library). The TDDL interacts with the TDDLi (TDDL interface), which connects to the rest of the TSS and ultimately either to an interoperable CSP, a TSS vendor specific CSP, or is written to directly by app developer tools like MSCAPI.

The point is, a critical feature of interoperability is the TDDL which is the responsibility of the TPM vendor according to TCG v1.1 spec 1.6.3 However, this foci of interoperability is one that is filled by NTRU. NTRU is a TSS provider, not a TPM provider. What appears to be the case is that NTRU has developed a TDDL (and perhaps a TDDi) that can address any existing TPM (regardless of whether the TDDL is formally a TPM OEM responsibility).

Going “out/in the top” of the TSS are the various interactions with the higher level langs/apps. There is apparently adequate variability in this aspect of the TSS for Wave to be able to market a CSP (call it a TSS/MSCAPI interface if you will) that simplifies the task for apps developers writing to multiple TSS vendors.

My point is that “interoperability” appears to be largely defined by the TDDL (or perhaps aspects of the TDDLi) and the CSP. In the case of a happy STM/NTRU/WAVX solution, Wave provides the CSP. I guess one could say that any TPM vendor that bundles NTRU/WAVX is an “interoperable TPM” but I believe it is missive to describe it as a characteristic of the TPM. The fancy and fun hook to all this is, although Wave’s CSP is TCG compliant “in/out the top” it has proprietary access points “out the side” to which Wave has apparently directed its proprietary KTM services thus giving a Trojan Horse quality to the CSP deployment (for which alone Wave likely gets a meager nickel a unit).

The above is as I understand things, and it could well be in error.

Regards,

Dig Space.


The above content is my opinion.

Join the InvestorsHub Community

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.