Wave Systems Corp. (fka WAVXQ)

[goin fishn]

OT?-A possible Wave/Microsoft link?

I don't know if this has been posted before, but even if it has, it might be useful to consider it again, in light of the Juniper and Nortel announcements.
I read the "smaller players filling NAC void article," and followed the link to another article on Microsoft's upcoming NAP capabilities in "Longhorn." Following are some quotes:


http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1779208,00.asp

Microsoft: Network Security Coming in Longhorn Client
By Ryan Naraine
March 24, 2005

Microsoft Corp. plans to fit out-of-the-box NAP capabilities into the Longhorn client due out in 2006.

That's the word from Jawad Khaki, corporate vice president of Microsoft's networking and devices technologies division.

During an hourlong Web chat to share details on Longhorn Networking, Khaki disclosed that the Longhorn client will ship with capabilities to enforce security policy compliance powered by Network Access Protection.

The initial release of NAP was originally planned for the server variant of Longhorn scheduled for 2007, but Khaki said some features will find its way into the client version.

"Additionally, we are working with 40-plus partners who are industry leaders in anti-virus, intrusion detection [and] prevention, network access devices and much more to support the NAP architecture," Khaki said.

Network Access Protection is a policy enforcement platform that lets IT administrators set policies to "quarantine" and restricts clients from accessing a network until the clients can prove policy compliance.

"The idea behind NAP is that we create a framework that allows IT administrators to ensure policy compliance of their systems. In essence, a computer has to prove that it is healthy [compliant with policy] before it is allowed to connect to the network," Khaki said.

Doesn't this sound like TPMs attesting to a central server?

And this later:

During the chat session, Microsoft executives said Longhorn will feature improved usability and manageability for network security.

The plan is to have NAP serve as the framework to provide a "holistic" solution to protect networks as well as the devices and endpoints connected to the network, the executives said.


And last-maybe most interesting

About 40 third-party vendors have announced support for Microsoft NAP, including Cisco, Trend Micro Inc., eEye Digital Security, F-Secure Corp., Juniper Networks Inc., McAfee Inc., Nortel Networks Corp. and Symantec Corp.

My questions are:

Why would Nortel and Juniper demonstrate capability with the TNC architecture/Wave if "Longhorn" is going to come out with what sounds like a similar capability soon?

Wouldn't a "gorilla" like Microsoft squash an offering from Wave and TCG/TNC if they both did the same thing? (So, again, why the interest from Nortel and Juniper-or the military-especially considering that Vista will be out soon, as well?)

Why would Microsoft come out with a totally different system if they are an important part of the TCG, and must have played a role in at least approving the TCG specs on Trusted Network Connect? Why would they bother with TCG/TNC if they had a product already in development that would be competition with their own when it was released?

Is Longhorn a threat to Wave, or is it Microsoft's incorporation of TNC in it's own products?

Last, if "Longhorn" uses TNC, does this suggest that there may be a link between the TNC/Wave and the above mentioned companies, including Cisco-if they are compatible with Longhorn, are they compatibile with TNC?

From what I have read on this board, any TPM network will require at least a part of Wave's IP to allow TPMs from different manufacturers to communicate with the central server within the same network-no one else has this capability yet, am I correct? So, that would mean that those who choose to implement TNC will need at least that IP from Wave. I assume that is why Juniper and Nortel are demonstrating with Wave.
I have no intention of implying anything concrete here, but I felt that these interesting convergences might give some valuable clues. At the very least, it is something to keep an eye on. Or, am I way off base?

Comments?

goin fish