Monday 23 January 2017 The one stop source for free breaking news, expert analysis, and videos on AIM and LSE listed shares


It's back! the ShareProphets TERNer prize for Geeks

By Nigel Somerville, the Deputy Sheriff of AIM | Wednesday 10 February 2016


Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from ShareProphets). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.


It's all Geek to me, but since readers of ShareProphets are (by definition) of superior intelligence then the techno-rantings of Mr Ramper Loon deserve a wider audience. Mr Loon's comments came in a volley of four comments....over to the prize Geek:

Device Authority [whose D-FACTOR authentication components have been incorporated int i Cryptosoft's latest upgraded package] holds a number of US Patents on PKI, Public Key Infrastructure, specifically related to Authentication of Devices..

http://www.deviceauthority.com/technology/patent-marking

In respect of PKI,

https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en-GB&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=PKI

Rather than ‘Device Authority’ we get ‘Certificate Authority’. This is all about exchange of ‘Public Keys’ whereby the ‘Certificate Authority’ acts to verify that the owner of the ‘Public Key’ is the ‘Real’ owner of that ‘Public Key’ and can therefore be ‘trusted’ but then of course you have to ‘trust’ the ‘Certificate Authority’ and that trust has been broken on numerous occasions resulting in the opportunity for ‘Man In The Middle Attacks’, MITM.

Presumably Device Authority’s Patents provide a method specific to IOT and M2M that either totally make this problem go away or make it much harder to perform such an attack. It is likely to be the latter because if their ‘secret sauce’ solved the problem they would not be messing about with CryptoSoft. They would be worth bazillions in their own right because they would own the keys to Cheryl Cole’s Chastity Belt.

Even if it were to be the latter then consider that IOT/M2M is just a slightly dumbed down example of any computing device so if their ‘sauce’ was truly that good, and protected via granted patents, they would have already Pwned Teh World without having to mess about with CryptoSoft.

Things to make you go Hmmmmm.

Of course then we get the problem that these are US granted Patents and as such just provide protection for product sold into the US. I think Tom has an inkling about that one given what is going on with Premaitha. IIRC they have just made progress in the Indian Market and Illumina has no Patent Presence there, not that they, Illumina, night not try to file.

The other issue with US granted Patents especially in the Computing/Software field is that other Patent Authorities outside of the US set the bar slightly higher and what gets Granted in the US by and large will be kicked out on its ear elsewhere.

Time for a bit of DYOR..

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/searchResults?submitted=true&locale=en_EP&DB=EPODOC&ST=singleline&query=DEVICEAUTHORITY%2C+INC&Submit=Search

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=5&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20101223&CC=US&NR=2010325704A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2010325704A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20101223&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=4&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20101223&CC=US&NR=2010325710A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2010325710A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20101223&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20110421&CC=US&NR=2011093703A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2011093703A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20110421&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=2&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20121213&CC=US&NR=2012317622A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2012317622A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20121213&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=0&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20150409&CC=US&NR=2015101031A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2015101031A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20150409&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=1&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20141204&CC=US&NR=2014359736A1&KC=A1
http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2014359736A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20141204&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

As per all of the above you can see that these ‘Patents’ have been transferred about the place a bit..

UNILOC
UNITAUTHORITY
DEVICEAUTHORITY

and from one of the above….

http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/inpadoc?CC=US&NR=2011093703A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=3&date=20110421&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

Event date : 2015/01/09 Event code : AS Code Expl.: ASSIGNMENT NEW OWNER : FORTRESS CREDIT CO LLCCALIFORNIA EFFECTIVE DATE : 20141230 FURTHER INFORMATION : SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.; UNILOC CORPORATION PTY LIMITEDUNILOC USAINC.;REEL/FRAME:034747/0001

Did someone hock the family jewels and then who are these ‘disparate’ bunch of companies and what are they doing Assigning Ownership of Granted or Applied For Patents back and forth to each other? Surely if the ‘sauce’ is worth something they would be making money on it. Dare I suggest it smells a bit ENRT to me?

And then…. What do Cryptosoft, who have no Patents themselves, gain by being involved in a Partnership with Device Authority in terms of ‘locking something down’ in respect of these Swap Shop Patents? As I suggest if they were worth anything in ‘Doing What it Says On The Tin’ terms they would have already been snapped up.

I’ll leave ZZtop to explain things…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uMRpNwelDk

It certainly makes more sense than,

http://uk.advfn.com/cmn/fbb/thread.php3?id=34146865&from=28666#firstpost

 

In respect of Uniloc…

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=UNILOC+USA

Assuming it is the same Uniloc…

I do hope for the sake of the other Ramper Loonies on Still Waiting’s ADVFN thread that they are not relying on Device Authority adding much credibility to Cryptosofts bow.

 

 

Good Grief..

Event date : 2015/01/09 Event code : AS Code Expl.: ASSIGNMENT NEW OWNER : FORTRESS CREDIT CO LLCCALIFORNIA EFFECTIVE DATE : 20141230 FURTHER INFORMATION : SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.; UNILOC CORPORATION PTY LIMITEDUNILOC USAINC.;REEL/FRAME:034747/0001

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/you-cant-patent-simple-math-judge-tells-patent-troll-uniloc/

Well.. actually you cannot patent ‘math’ and encryption is based on ‘math’…

“***Uniloc Luxembourg*** filed 16 suits in the Eastern District in December 2012 and about a dozen in October 2012. Several of those cases have been withdrawn by Uniloc, probably due to settlements.”

Surely Cryptosoft cannot be involved with ‘Patent Trolls’?

http://www.deviceauthority.com/technology/patent-marking

US8464059
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DEVICE BOUND PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE

http://www.google.com/patents/US8464059?cl=zh

Inventors Ric B. Richardson, Craig S. Etchegoyen, Dono Harjanto, Bradley C. Davis

http://www.deviceauthority.com/company/leadership-team

“Mr. Harjanto is a founding member of the team and heads up the product and security architecture for Device Authority’s D-FACTOR™ Authentication Engine. He is an avid technical team leader with over eight years of specialized expertise in device authentication technology. He is also the inventor of 8 US patents in Device Authority’s IP portfolio. Prior to Device Authority, Mr. Harjanto has held principle and senior engineering positions in several device-related technology companies, including BlueCava, *****Uniloc USA*****, and Sky MobileMedia.”

http://www.google.com/patents/US8464059?cl=zh#legal-events

Jan 9, 2015 AS Assignment
Owner name: FORTRESS CREDIT CO LLCCALIFORNIA
Free format text: SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:UNILOC LUXEMBOURG, S.A.; UNILOC CORPORATION PTY LIMITEDUNILOC USAINC.;REEL/FRAME:034747/0001
Effective date: 20141230

Who actually ‘owns’ anything within this, ‘Patent Troll Field’, and what ‘rights’ do Cryptosoft really think they have?

I do note that Still Waiting and His Stalwarts on ADVFN attempt to blither on about, for example, ARM. Are ARM really going to get involved with a company that is associated with a company that uses, lack of patentable, technology that is apparently supported or otherwise owned by a ‘Patent Troll’ other than telling them to fuck off when they come sniffing?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uMRpNwelDk

- See more at: http://www.shareprophets.com/views/18611/tern-cryptosoft-update-is-it-placing-ahoy#sthash.exV6J5rg.dpuf


Filed under:


Never miss a story.




This area of the ShareProphets.com site is for independent financial commentary. These blogs are provided by independent authors via a common carrier platform and do not represent the opinions of ShareProphets.com. ShareProphets.com does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over these articles and does not therefore accept responsibility for or make any warranties in connection with or recommend that you or any third party rely on such information. The information available at ShareProphets.com is for your general information and use and is not intended to address your particular requirements. In particular, the information does not constitute any form of advice or recommendation by ShareProphets.com and is not intended to be relied upon by users in making (or refraining from making) any investment decisions.


More on TERN


Comments


Enter your comment below. Fields marked * are required. You must preview your comment first before finally posting.




Site by Everywhen