Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : JAWS Technologies - NASDAQ (NM):JAWZ -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Phantom Dialer who wrote (2079)	4/25/1999 1:06:00 AM
From: caly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3086

Nope, stupid question. Wanted to take it back and tried to, but you were too quick. IMVHO, JAWZ is probably doing the right thing in taking it to the university first. If there's a flaw and the people know their stuff, they'll likely find it. Save them the embarrassment of having Schneier find it and maybe cost them less. Coming up with a solid crypto algorithm is by no means an easy task. Schneier himself said there's no shame in having someone find a flaw in your algorithm because it's such a monumental task to come up with a good one. Look at the submissions to NIST for AES that have already been discarded because of flaws. IMO, JAWZ investors should focus on the security services unit that the company is trying to build. There's good money in that. Just invested in PILT hoping I'm right.

To: Phantom Dialer who wrote (2079)	4/25/1999 2:00:00 AM
From: justaninvestor	Respond to of 3086

Phantom .. I think that Calypso asked you the question about Certicom because CIC was developed by 2 profs from the University of Waterloo - a very respected computer sciences school. The university that JAWS is using has built a similar faculty - one of the profs that is looking at JAWS has published 2 crypto books. To my knowledge, Schneier hasn't looked at CIC's ECC. JAWS doesn't want to use Schneier because they believe that it's a potential conflict of interest - the $50,000 is not the issue, so you can hold off on your aluminum can drive. BTW, Schneier's negative references to JAWS have been from a marketing perspective - he doesn't like it when companies have "crack-the-code" contests. That's fine for him to say, but it's a free country and we did put up $5M last summer, nobody cracked the code and it got us some press. Now, I realize that brute attacks aren't the only way that an algorithm can be attacked, but the companies that we're dealing with, Ernst & Young, Citrix, Network Associates certainly haven't made an issue of this. Barrie Einarson Director Investor Relations JAWS Technologies Inc. 1-888-301-5297 1-403-508-5055 Hours: 8:00AM - 5:PM MST Contact me @ mailto:invrel@jawstech.com Website: jawstech.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keep your data safe! Download a free trial copy of JAWS Data Encryption For The Desktop Software. Click here: jawstech.com Barrie Einarson Director Investor Relations JAWS Technologies Inc. 1-888-301-5297 1-403-508-5055 Hours: 8:00AM - 5:PM MST Contact me @ mailto:invrel@jawstech.com Website: jawstech.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Keep your data safe! Download a free trial copy of JAWS Data Encryption For The Desktop Software. Click here: jawstech.com