Zeev,
What makes you think that the security co-processor has to be a separate entity from the main processor? The security co-processor only needs to be separate from the traditional computing environment to meet the intent of the invention. The patent even specifically addresses including the co-processor functionality on the host processor saying that the "preference" is for it to be separate.
“It should be understood that the location of the security co-processor 122 can vary and, without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention, it can be fixed inside or outside the computer 114 or the keyboard 118, as long as the secure computing environment 104 is separate from the traditional computing environment 102. Preferably, the security co-processor 122 functions as an outboard processor separate from a processor inside the host computer 114.”
“The system 100 architecture in accordance with the present invention, with the secure computing environment 104 being separated from the traditional computing environment 102 by the interface 134, enables the distributed processing of the electronic transactions.”
Even though I am not a patent lawyer, I'd think that even if all the functionality of the secure co-processor were split up into different components (eg. an kernal in ring 0, curtained memmory in RAM, BIOS ROM mods, a secure encryption chip on the motherboard, etc.), adding these components to the traditional computing environment would meet the intent of the invention with regard to the co-processor component.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
