[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security

Subject: Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security
From: "Timothy J. Miller" <email@hidden>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:08:02 -0500
Delivered-to: email@hidden
Delivered-to: email@hidden
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (Windows/20060308)

Joel Esler wrote:

But what makes us think that a chip is going to protect the machine?

With, TPM I can construct what amounts to a hardware security module that can protect an RSA keypair. That will allow me to assign device certificates with higher assurance that they won't move from machine to machine. Once that's in place, that certificate can be leveraged in all sorts of different security scenarios.

-- Tim

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Fed-talk mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/fed-talk/email@hidden

This email sent to email@hidden

References:
	>[Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security (From: George Polich <email@hidden>)
	>Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security (From: Joel Esler <email@hidden>)

Prev by Date: Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security
Next by Date: [Fed-Talk] Apple - Seminars Online - Aperture Advanced
Previous by thread: Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security
Next by thread: Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Home