Re: [Fed-Talk] FW: Army to require built-in security
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
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:
This email sent to email@hidden