Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Navy Patents the Firewall?
Krishna Dagli writes to mention a post by Bruce Schneier on his site indicating that the U.S. Navy may be patenting the Firewall. Whether or not it is their intention to do so is unclear. From the patent description: "In a communication system having a plurality of networks, a method of achieving network separation between first and second networks is described. First and second networks with respective first and second degrees of trust are defined, the first degree of trust being higher than the second degree of trust. Communication between the first and second networks is enabled via a network interface system having a protocol stack, the protocol stack implemented by the network interface system in an application layer."
I was going to make a "first post", but I think I read the Army is patenting that. Part of their Military Initiative to kill first, ask questions later.
And my cisco, and my netopia, and my netgear.
I'm going to patent filing stupid patents, cant wait to sue everyone!
So, does this get thrown out under "prior art at any Best Buy" or "un-patently obvious"?
Maybe it's a sad attempt to prove that they're on the cutting edge of technology by patenting some newfangled idea that the rest of us have been using for years? I guess they probably have some catching up to do since EDS has been "working" on their IT infrastructure for years (That's why their stock price fell by half and never recovered don't you know? Well that and lying about the revenues that were coming in from it...)
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
My Sorceress on Diablo II has prior art. She can lay down Firewalls like it's no one's business!
Wait, what's this about networks?
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
I was unaware that the US could patent anything! I thought the government had no IP rights, such as the ability to copyright or patent things. I guess I was wrong?
The US government might actually be entitled to many internet patents, as all or most of the technology behind the (early) internet was financed with U.S. tax payer money. Which, in a democratic country, should (but not necessarily does) mean that those patents are in the public domain.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
Seems rather curious that this should come up shortly after the mention of patenting software. I wonder if this is an indication of a soon to be trend in IT as a whole.
isn't the US Government not allowed to have any IP rights?
IP = Intellectual Property
In a communication system having a plurality of networks...?
A plurality in what sense? If I operate many networks I can only use this firewall if I have more networks than everyone else I know?
Instinctively, I hate the notion of the government patenting anything. It might be because it seems ridiculous that anything the taxpayers paid for should be made unavailable to them. But... I can't find anything in the constitution that makes this abhorent practice illegal or unjustified. My reaction seems motivated by civic virtue rather than a legal basis.
Does anyone know of a solid legal reason that the government shouldn't be able to obtain patents?
I can't wait to see how they deliver the cease and desist orders.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
Shouldn't be a problem... the means of implementing a system such as the one described have been public knowledge since about 1989 - so, forever, or just about.
perl -e 'foreach(values %SIG){$_="IGNORE";}while(){}'
Government's view of the economy: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving,regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it.
Actually most of the time, the government does not seize patents. Not that they don't have the ability to, or that perhaps they don't just go ahead and infringe on them sometimes, but the military spends a lot of money buying stuff from contractors/vendors every year, because the vendor has a patent on stuff. If we were in the middle of World War III, the situation might be slightly different.
So if someone in the Navy really did have a novel idea, it's not hard to imagine that they might want to get it patented, just as a defensive measure.
My big question is: if the government patents something, wouldn't the invention automatically be in the public domain, provided that it wasn't classified? Normally all products produced by government employees in the course of their jobs are in the public domain, so I would think that a patent held by the Navy would be impossible to use aggressively.
In that situation -- assuming that's true, and the Navy can't collect royalties -- then having the Navy (or other government agencies) patent stuff might be a very good idea. For the small taxpayer expense that it takes to file and maintain the patent, the country might be saved millions of dollars a year of royalties and litigation costs.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
...ZoneAlarm patents sonar & stealth marine technology
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
The Holy Grail when I worked with military networks (admittedly 10 years ago) was "multilevel security" which could enable a "top secret" and "secret" network to coexist and share data in a very controlled way. Information can go up, but never down. The hard part is how do you receive mail or do other things which require a two-way protocol? We built boxes which could sit in the middle and could pass messages. This appears to be a more advanced version of that.
intellectual property lawyers will fight wars in courtrooms.
Countries possessing patents of mass destruction (PMD) will be sanctioned first, and later sued by the Air Force.
If other countries think we kick ass now, wait until they meet our legions of lawyers.
USNVY - 23.40 +1.40
Help a man when he is in trouble and he will remember you when he is in trouble again.
If I were to conjecture here, the Navy has a very large problem in that it uses a large number of networks, which traditionally haven't been connected, due to security reasons (the most sensitive data is stored on unconnected networks). The problem has been that, to get information properly, an operator must have multiple terminals. I think that the intent is not necessarily to patent the firewall, but more to patent a trusted solution to allow interconnectivity between the different networks, allowing people to read down, and send information up.
just an analog boy living in a digital age.
By patenting the firewall the Navy may stop those companies that seem to patent things solely to send you extortion notes for licensing. Typically the federal gov't can't/doesn't license them. Since they are taxpayer funded they seem to be "Ours." Actually there are a lot of patents that I wish they had. Anyone know for sure if this will essentially place the firewall patent in the public domain?
From what I've read of the actual patent so far, it appears that it is a very specific implementation of a specific type of firewall.
See claim 3 for example - What they are describing implies a machine with two dedicated processors with shared memory, one for each network. Note that for what they are describing, a typical SMP or dual core system does NOT count - It seems that they are effectively describing two seperate machines in one box that can communicate via shared memory.
Also other claims imply that the patented system will be talking to each network at the application level, so it's more of a special form of proxy server rather than a firewall.
I don't have time right now to read further details, but keep in mind that even specific patents can appear much broader than they are in the abstract. For example, one can't patent the wheel or a tire, but when patenting a tire with a specific tread pattern, it might appear in the abstract that the applicant is trying to patent the tire in general even when they're not.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
i love it. "the navy patents the firewall!!!one!". and they include a link to a Patent Application.
here's a tip: an application aint a patent.
---
Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
I don't see this as a PR stunt, its just bilious. VLANs and Firewalls already exist, but maybe the navy has found something more secure. If they have, wonderful. I just wonder how they can patent something thats seems to just be an upgrade instead of a new idea.
Good. Now that they've invented the firewall, MAYBE they'll share this newfound knowledge with other parts of the US gov't, AND they all can start securing their networks.
It is no wonder Washington has been pressuring London to send that poor guy over here so they could ruin his life. I mean if they didn't know firewalls existed, they probably don't know what a non-blank password is either!
If the government patents an invention funded by our tax dollars, it would
prevent others coming along later to claim it as their own.
There would be no need to fight about prior arts and such.
As long as it's freely licensed, this could be a good thing.
The way that I see it, it already is a trend. There are more and more junk patents out there that exist for the sole purpose of lawsuits. There are companies whose entire property is IP. They make money by sueing others when they feel that something conflicts with their incredibly broad claim.
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
If you're of the opinion that elections are basically a big job interview where the public is a very large panel of interviewers who select the persons for the jobs of public office. That office being contained within the cubicles and corridors MyCountry inc. And the shareholders (taxpayers) through their selected representitives steer the corporations policy as desired. Then, when Mycountry inc. or one of it's wholly owned subsiduarys (MyArmy inc.) files for, and is granted, IP, that IP belongs to the Company as a whole, and the major shareholders get to decide what projects to put that IP towards. And being a one-shareholder-one-vote system everyone get's equal status, standing and therefore equale share of and use of the IP rights.
Probably
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
To all of you shooting from the hip: STOP! You're just making a fool of yourself.
Read the claims. Read them in light of the description of the patent. And learn patent terminology. Then you can make some general statements. And if it's only a publication (like this navy one), not a patent, don't even bother with that.
If you must draw a conclusion, and you're sure this is about a firewall, then at least go the step to know they are claiming a type of firewall. Which is perfectly legit (as long as it contains a new, non-obvious element). If you think otherwise, go learn about patents, come back, and then we'll talk.
PS:plurality is a very common patent term. It means more than one (duh!). Not even worth making a comment about, but someone felt compelled to jabber about it.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Trusted Computer Solutions has a product called Trusted Gateway that allows for one-way transfer of files from a lower classification network to a higher one such as transfers from the Unclass NIPRNET to the Secret SIPRNET. It can be configured to allow specific status messages to come back down so you know files have made it through. I am working on a large project at the Air Force Weather Agency to ugrade their "data pipe".
Marcus J. Ranum .. is recognized as the inventor of the proxy firewall, and the implementor of the first commercial firewall product.
davecb5620@gmail.com
I can only several reasons that the government patenting something might be fair:
1) If a non-American entity (person, company, etc.) wants to use the technology, then it would basically be the American people selling the right to use the patented technology to non-Americans. In that way, Americans, who funded the research, win.
2) In some sense, something that benefits the Navy does benefit Americans in general. When the Navy licenses a patented technology to a private company, this (hopefully) causes some money to move from that private entity to a public one (the U.S. govt.) That basically co-funds something that all taxpayers were having to chip in on the payment of (that is, the cost of government / national defense).
3) Suppose that even if a technology has been made available for free, no one can afford to commercialize it if more than one company will be doing the commercialization. This might happen, for example, if the market is very small. For example, if there are just two competitors and 10 companies that might build the device, then each of those 10 companies facies great risk. So granting an exclusive license to use the patented technology could be the only way to get even one company to build the device in that situation.
This will certainly make those illegal searches easier, when the only way to have a firewall is to license it from the Navy.
Al Gore patented it already.
I like your sig, but the correct spelling is hangar. FYI!
The Navy patents the Army!
The government, when faced with the failure of the Clipper chip and seeing the coming tide of encryption, saw the value of patenting. They, specifically NSA, needed a way to always be able to crack encryption so they patented DES. No need for a backdoor!
A US Government body cannot Patent or copyright. They only thing that they can do is to make it "secret", "top secret", or place it under the guise of national security.
The patent does not apply to packet filter firewalls (the majority of all firewalls, including the ones you listed) because it says the packets traverse the application layer. The market for application layer (proxy) firewalls is actually pretty narrow. The main contender (SideWinder) recently bought out the 2 main competitors (Gauntlet and CyberGuard). Whether it would apply to hybrid firewalls (packet filters that do deep inspection, like Checkpoint and Netscreen) is less clear.
Software sucks. Open Source sucks less.
So, They will award the contract to develop a new firewall to EDS, and the project will run 60 billion dollars and 5 years over budget...sorry, if anyone has worked on the joint USMC/USN portal project, you will see the humor in this :o)
----- I have bad karma for a reason! -----
That being said, how does one submit prior art for this application? This thing really needs to die last Tuesday.
Help us build a better map!
How much do you trust a network or rather the users and programs on that network? Experience showed us that there is no such thing as a trusted network. Corporate intranets are suddenly pentrated by laptops, WIFI and other mobile devices. SSH tunnels create unmonitorable connections to the outside world. Email and Webdownloads create other holes. So again, how can anybody define "trust" in a network, or even a "network" in the first place?
As a project lead for the Army at an installation that does a lot of R&D, when we patent something 1 of 3 things happen to it. 1) We grant rights to the patent to someone in industry to produce the produce on a large scale for us. 2) (more common) We just transfer the patent to the company that will produce the product for the military. Personally I think #1 is a better option, but #2 happens a lot. 3) The patent becomes public domain, and the military never has to worry about being sued over licensing issues from someone else developing the technology.
I hear the Chinese are looking for a new vendor...
What are they going to do? Them and what army? And even if, I am in another country. Ha!
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
That sounds more like a secure gateway system that will allow "regular" military networks to talk to "trusted" military networks while still maintaining the required level of separation between the two. An application of which would be to allow inteligence gathered off of the web (or other public network) to be quickly and easily transferred to a secure network for analysis.
I mean TFA itself says that this is for an *application layer* protocol stack, not transport layer port blocking or network layer address translation (although presumably both of those things would also be going on).
You are attempting to read sigs. Cancel or Allow?
Not all licences from government patents are for medical industries - some(many) go to other industries; i.e. entertainment, communications, energy, etc
It may be better in some cases that the Navy(or some other government department) own a patent rather put it into the public domain. If it's in the public domain there is no control on it but if it's patented and licensed then their is a measure of control. Some government non-exclusive licenses are based primarily on proper (and/or limited) usage of the device/concept rather on straight monetary gain.
But what if the government were to seize these rights on the grounds that no-one else could claim them as their own, and such third party scum would not be able to sue the pants off someone else. They own the rights, which in actuality are held by the public domain.
We're all hypocrites. We all have hidden parts, it's the contrast between them that make us more a hypocrite than others
Ah no humor here. NMCI is a bad idea implemented poorly for the wrong reasons. NMCI in a reseach environment is like forcing a course threaded nut on a fine thread bolt. The Navy research labs maintain a "legacy" network because it is the only network that provides the flexibility to get the job done - so the end result is that there are two networks, two vulnerablities, two system admin expenses, two computers on most desks, and difficulting in getting data from one to the other - all in the name of saving money and being more secure. I must keep reminding myself that this is government they are going to save money no matter how much it is going to cost.
I'm going to patent Breathing. "A respiratory process that keeps biological beings alive"
http://sohilsblog.blogspot.com
PRIOR ART! PRIOR ART!
How can the patent office allow anyone to get a patent on anything that has already been in general use for ages?
Read claim 3: "The method of claim 2, wherein the configuring includes implementing the network interface system with distinct sets of first and second processors, the first and second processors having a shared memory." ...configuring the interprocessor communication channel to communicate moving averages ...and configuring the network interface system to prevent the shared memory from overflowing ...by controlling the ... network interface system. "
This puts the firewall smack into the hardware, not on the extension cord going out of the building. This is a firewall between computers that are in the same cabinet, not on the same internet. It also provides for loadleveling in Claim 6:
"...via an interprocessor communication channel;
Further claims in the patent app show that the data is not transferred by just any program, but by an API on the firewall CPU and the boxen on either side of the firewall. This looks like some seriously secure stuff here.
Also, your normal firewall allows inside ("your" computer) to talk outside (the internet) freely, but prevents outside from getting in. This patent app specifies that the outside can talk freely to the inside, but the inside can't just blab to the world. This keeps the worms in the can. It also randomizes time signatures so that form of black box analysis won't tell you anything.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
if it's in the public domain there is no control on it but if it's patented and licensed then their is a measure of control.
Sorry, I don't buy that argument unless you can also explain why exactly the government should have such control.
Also, as ITAR and similar treaties show, it is quite possible to have control in specific cases where national or international security becomes a concern.
Some government non-exclusive licenses are based primarily on proper (and/or limited) usage of the device/concept rather on straight monetary gain.
Ah yes.. the government gets to decide what is 'proper use'..
The USPTO's toll-free number is 800 786-9199 (free call anywhere in the US). They're really friendly people, and you'll get a human waaaay faster than you can, even in person, at the USPS.
The patent examiner for this application is Syed Zia, and their phone number is 571-272-3798.
This patent is about to be issued, ACT QUICKLY, DAMMIT!. You need to file a protest as outlined in Chapter 1,900 of the Manual for Patent Exam Procedure with the USPTO. When you do, it is vital that you also send a copy to the NRL's council at the following address as well:
NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
ASSOCIATE COUNSEL (PATENTS)
CODE 1008.2
4555 OVERLOOK AVENUE, S.W.
WASHINGTON DC
20375-5320
US
This patent could be issued without protest if you don't act now! Move all Slashdot for great justice ! Take off every protest ! You know what you doing ! Move Zig ! Or all your patent will belong to us !
Help us build a better map!
3) The patent becomes public domain, and the military never has to worry about being sued over licensing issues from someone else developing the technology.
Seeing how this is being payed for by tax dollars, option 3 is really the only acceptable option.
Patents by government agencies automatically go into the public domain.
Wouldn't this be what Smoothwall does? http://www.smoothwall.org/
I've got it running at home. It's got 3 NICs, Green, Orange and Red. Red is Internet (not trusted), Green is local private network (trusted), and Orange is local webservers, etc (partially trusted).
It's got a built in IDS, Snort proxy, packet and connection logging, etc.etc. and addon modules give things like web content filtering and bandwidth management.
Does this count as an application level firewall? I'd think with the IDS it does, but what does everybody else think?
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
so it's just my screen, then, that this story showed up as "U.S. Navy Patents the Firewall?"? with that big-bolded question mark sticking out at the end of it?
... or the words: "... indicating that the U.S. Navy may be patenting the Firewall." --- am i the only one who sees them?
... i mean, seriously, you could at least pick a *valid* point upon which to troll!
i love it.
But what if the offender is landlocked?
but offhand I can't remember any attempts to do this in the network infrastructure.
This is a hard enough problem to be worth a patent, if it's even possible. Such a system has to block both a "read up" in which a system cleared for Secret asks for Top Secret information, it also has to prevent "write down", in which a Top Secret system which has been Trojaned or operated by Aldrich Ames tries to send information to a Secret or unclassified system.
Sound easy? Stop and think about covert channels.
Quick question for you to answer so that I may better respond to you concern -- Do you believe that individuals and companies have the privilege of patents and subsequent licensing?
... patents are not a right they are a privilege, much like a driver's licence.
AS for your "ah yes ..." well who else would get to decide what is proper use? The owner of the patent has the right to stipulate conditions under which a patent/device/concept is licenced - in this case the owner just happens to be a government department.
For those who are wondering
One problem with many FOSS projects is that all the website talks about is "release x.y.z, bugs fixed: this ant, that gnat, yonder blunder," etc.
I looked over the smoothie website quickly and didn't see a list of features. The main page talks about the history of the project, not features of the product.
This is epidemic among open source projects and Linux distros.
So in answer to yer question, after reading the smoothie website, I can't tell if it's some newfangled firewall or an ice cream fruit drink.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
Quick question for you to answer so that I may better respond to you concern -- Do you believe that individuals and companies have the privilege of patents and subsequent licensing?
At this moment they have that privilege indeed (and I agree with calling it a privilege)
They are just our for revenge because Al Gore grabbed the credit for inventing the Internet. (:
~~ What's stopping you?
When I read the description I wondered if they were deliberately trying to get patent office employees eyes to glase over. No wonder so many un-patentable ideas get patented.
Then why not allow government departments that invest their time and effort to have the privilege of patents and subsequent liscenses as well?
Do you beleive that all companies should just be able to take a government department's work in a particular field and use it without having to pay for it?
I think China already holds patents and trademarks for all things *wall, other than the Berlin wall.
Simpy
Then why not allow government departments that invest their time and effort to have the privilege of patents and subsequent liscenses as well?
Patents exist to promote novel and usefull inventions. The method behind this is granting exclusive rights for a limited amount of time to the inventor so (s)he can compensate for investment and make a buck from the invention.
The granting of exclusive rights is how society 'pays' the inventor for his efford and investment.
In the case of a government department however society already payed the inventor for both. The investment comes from tax money, and so does the salary of the inventor.
There is no reason for society to pay twice for the same thing.
Do you beleive that all companies should just be able to take a government department's work in a particular field and use it without having to pay for it?
As long as they pay taxes they already payed for it.
Now that's what I call a Submarine Patent!
*ducks*
How many times do you monkeys need to be told that abstracts are not part of the patent... read the claims.
But public domain is international .... so "all companies" would not have to have any participation in a nation (thus pay no taxes) to use the concept produced by any government department.
Things you should note: There is no such thing as a multi-level secure (MLS) operating system (OS) that is in common use. Sun used to be certified, but it was always several years before the OS could be certified and by then the technology had moved on. Note also that there are various ancient versions of the Oracle DB that were certified MLS. No more. They typically run only in a "system high" mode where everything on the net is assumed to be at the same classification level.
The fine folk at NRL are producing something closer to a "High Assurance Guard" between networks of various security levels. An example is Radiant Mercury, which I have been informed is a PITA to use and a constant drain of funds because you have to go back to the vendor every time you need to open it up for an application. It's a very restrictive and expensive tool. Anything that will permit a cheaper, and faster guard will benefit them.
-- Improve Windows - Buy a Mac!
In retaliation, I'll patent "a large, centrally-organized flotilla of military ships and aircraft, and supporting infrastructure."
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
By patenting the firewall the Navy may stop those companies that seem to patent things solely to send you extortion notes for licensing.
;-)
so... you think this is actually the Navy's anti-Submarine Patent?
Patent it and then license the patent to whoever wants it for a reasonable amount to collect money to offset the developement costs. Money then goes towards developing more new technology. (Although currently they do this and it goes back into the general fund)
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Well if the US Navy patents the Firewall then the patent in effect belongs to every tax paying U.S. Citizen.
But public domain is international .... so "all companies" would not have to have any participation in a nation (thus pay no taxes) to use the concept produced by any government department.
Public domain is as international as a patent. If another country does not recognize your patents then companies there can use them without license already.
Why do we allow government agencies to patent developments? The taxes paid by the public funded the research, so why should the results not fall into the public domain?
"Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
I guess all U.S. taxpayers would then own the firewall. I'm looking forward
to my first royalty check from Cisco.
Yes but we were initially discussing how a new(?) concept should be released by a government department to it's people/etc, not whether all counties respect patent laws.
While in some countries patents may not be respected, in many other nations cross-border patents and liscensing are respected as is the concept of public domian. So if the taxpayers of a nation are solely to get a benefit then the concept should not be freely available to the world in general through public domain.
Or do you wish to see the government have a pre-defined patent (and/or copyright) liscense that all taxpayers of a nation are able to use all the government's efforts and results without further cost?
Yes but we were initially discussing how a new(?) concept should be released by a government department to it's people/etc, not whether all counties respect patent laws.
Then why argue that public domain is international? Either the outside world is important or it is not. You can't bring it into the discussion when it comes in handy and ignore it otherwise however.
While in some countries patents may not be respected, in many other nations cross-border patents and liscensing are respected as is the concept of public domian. So if the taxpayers of a nation are solely to get a benefit then the concept should not be freely available to the world in general through public domain.
Aha?
Last time I checked, obtaining a patent in the USA does not make it enforcable in say the EU or Japan or such. You have to obtain a seperate patent in those places.
It rather seems that patents are really mostly a national afair and cross border validity is the exception, not the rule.
Also, seeing how a patent is a privilege granted by government on behalf of society to an inventor, it is silly to expect that the USA government for example can grant that privilege on behalf of the Brittish people, since the USA government does not represent them.
Or do you wish to see the government have a pre-defined patent (and/or copyright) liscense that all taxpayers of a nation are able to use all the government's efforts and results without further cost?
In short yes.
I see no reason why government should also be running an enterprise that participates as a provider on the free market, especially since government is also the one to protect that same market and has regulatory powers there.
your firewall is ours;)
I thought that US patents and copyrights were 'private' rights; i.e. could be held by individuals and corporations. But not by parts of the US Government. Last I saw, the US Navy wasn't in private hands.
So how do you go about licensing a patent held by the Navy ?
1] The disclosure lists the inventors, but does not list an assignee. That means that the inventors own the patent, not the US Navy. You are being befuddled by the name of the place these guys work. Try doing a USPTO search with Microsoft as assignee to see what a patent looks like when the inventors don't own the patent rights.
2] It's not a patent for *THE* firewall, which everyone already knows about. It's for partitioning a trusted network, which means that the network itself can be certified as a C2 or B1 secure network. Try looking up operating systems which support those kinds of security - they've been around since the 80's.
What is right is that you get to use the patent if:
a. you are a US citizen and/or taxpayer
b. you pay for a license
c. your country gets a license for you to use
Your country might pay money, do some cross-licensing (sweet deal for the smaller country), or leave you to negotiate your own license.
Because inside is trusted software, it will only initiate an "approved" conversation with outside. Outside's replies are verified good by protocol, encryption, keys, etc, and acknowledged by Inside's software before being allowed thru the firewall. Once outside has a working connection and keys, it can freely flow data thru the firewall to inside.
But: there is no trusted app inside that can flow data out of the secure inside, so your secret data stays secret, no matter what the hackers do (in theory, of course someone's gonna crack it eventually).
This eliminates the entire "user doesn't have to do anything to get pwned" (like MSBlast, ahhhhhh, fond memories...).
"User visits malicious website and gets pwned" won't happen cuz the nasty software has to get approval from trusted software before it can get thru the screen door. This protection is possible cuz the only way in is thru invisible software on the inside that has invisible requirements. Since the approval/acknowledgement going out is encrypted or uses an unknown protocol, the nasty doesn't even know when it gets a "yes", let alone how to misuse its connection.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
OK, but they don't have any money either - they get it from YOU.
Any money used by any corporation and/or lobbyist comes "from viewers^H^H^H^Hconsumers like you" as they say on PBS.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
So if the taxpayers of a nation are solely to get a benefit then the concept should not be freely available to the world in general through public domain.
What a poisonous idea. The automatic assumption that sharing ideas is bad.
Fact is, if tax money has paid for it then tax money has paid for it and the taxpayer should not pay more. That people in other countries benefit also is a plus, not a minus.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Do you really want other countries patenting ideas you could use when you start patenting ideas they could use? This is lose-lose.
---
Like software, intellectual property law is a product of the mind, and can be anything we want it to be. Let's get it right.
Patenting a firewall from the military is a natural. I patented the Air Conditioner to use as a Health System. I called it "Temperature Oscillation". http://www.newpath4.com/fountainofyouth_testanswer s.htm has some explanations how it works to build Body Stamina enough to stay ahead of the ladies on Sadie Hawkins Day in Dogpatch. Homepage has a picture explanation as well.
The 'military' isn't just about Army and Navy enlisted. There are many thousands of engineers and scientists on board. If you've ever walked through the cubicles of Dept of Defense types, sometimes you will see what is called the 'I love me' wall. I once saw one with over 20 patent plaques on his wall. The Fed Gov gets all the patents, with a small percentage going to the inventor. How do you think all of those submarines, advanced weapons, space shuttles, stealth bombers, robots, and all of the other big, bad-ass pieces of military equipment got built?
IE has levels of trust and its a browser.
It was kind of fun to look at the drawings for the patent app on the USPTO website (http://tinyurl.com/zc83g) and see the phrases "Network Pump sends message to the high wrapper" and "High wrapper sends ACK to the Network Pump". Just change a few letters. . .
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.