Problems with Current Solution Sample Clauses

Problems with Current Solution. The current practice does not capture the fact that there are different means of key creation, provisioning, storage, and access control which result in vastly different security properties of the private key used to setup secure TLS sessions. As described in [1], different DER devices may implement very different security mechanisms, and the level of protection that the device provides is not captured by current device certificate practices. Therefore, the security level is not accurately conveyed to the communication endpoint (e.g. the DER Server) that needs to decide whether to trust the device or not. The main differentiating factors of DER device security are [1]: • Key creation and provisioning. Some DER devices use keys for TLS that are created on the device by a cryptographic random number generator that derives strong randomness from the physical environment. Other devices use keys that are derived from limited entropy or are provisioned to the device in plaintext. • Key storage and access. Some DER devices store keys in a processing environment based on dedicated memory or memory encryption that is strongly isolated from the rest of the device and only specific code running on the device can access the private key. Other devices store the key in the main memory of the device and the private part of the key is accessible to all code running on the device. • Manufacturing process. Some DER devices may be manufactured using processes that are documented in great detail and evaluated by accredited auditing authorities (e.g., Common Criteria’s Security Evaluation Level [5] or FIPS 140-2 [7]), while other devices are manufactured using processes that are not documented or reviewed. In some cases, the manufacturing process of a DER device can be outsourced to another company or different country and the company that is considered the Manufacturer of the device has limited visibility to the actual manufacturing process of the device. The fact that a DER device has a key pair that has been certified by a trusted certification authority (CA) does not capture such important differences that determine how trustworthy the DER device is.
Sample 1Sample 2
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Problems with Current Solution

  • AGREEMENTS WITH CUSTOMERS The Products are provided by the Third Party Vendor. All Terms of Use or Service as established by the Third Party Vendor and as set forth inter alia at Microsoft Azure Agreement (xxxxx://xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx/en-us/support/legal/subscription- agreement-nov-2014/ ), Microsoft Azure Legal Information (xxxxx://xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx/en-us/support/legal/), Microsoft Online Subscription Agreement (xxxxx://xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx/en- us/support/legal/subscription-agreement/) and Microsoft Azure Service Level Agreement (xxxxx://xxxxx.xxxxxxxxx.xxx/en-us/support/legal/sla/ ) shall apply to the VAR’s resale activity and to the VAR’s Customers, including but not limited to the VAR’s indemnity of the Third Party Vendor based upon the VAR’s acts or omissions and including indemnity of the Third Party Vendor for any infringement claims arising from the combination by the VAR and/or Customers of Third Party Vendor’s intellectual property with the VAR or any third party’s intellectual property. The VAR agrees to provide each Customer with terms of use and gain their acceptance. You covenant, represent and warrant that you will present all Terms of Use or Service to each of your Customers and obtain their enforceable agreement to the Terms of Use or Service before permitting them to access or use the Products. You covenant, represent and warrant that no subscription for the Products shall be activated for or used by your Customers before the Customer agrees to the Terms of Use or Service. You will track and record acceptance by your Customers of the Terms of Use or Service and will provide such information to the Company upon request. The Company may modify these terms and conditions at any time. SCHEDULE 3 – ERPLY

  • Joint Funded Project with the Ohio Department of Transportation In the event that the Recipient does not have contracting authority over project engineering, construction, or right-of- way, the Recipient and the OPWC hereby assign certain responsibilities to the Ohio Department of Transportation, an authorized representative of the State of Ohio. Notwithstanding Sections IV, VI.A., VI.B., VI.C., and VII of the Project Agreement, Recipient hereby acknowledges that upon notification by the Ohio Department of Transportation, all payments for eligible project costs will be disbursed by the Grantor directly to the Ohio Department of Transportation. A Memorandum of Funds issued by the Ohio Department of Transportation shall be used to certify the estimated project costs. Upon receipt of a Memorandum of Funds from the Ohio Department of Transportation, the OPWC shall transfer funds directly to the Ohio Department of Transportation via an Intra-State Transfer Voucher. The amount or amounts transferred shall be determined by applying the Participation Percentages defined in Appendix D to those eligible project costs within the Memorandum of Funds. In the event that the Project Scope is for right-of-way only, notwithstanding Appendix D, the OPWC shall pay for 100% of the right-of-way costs not to exceed the total financial assistance provided in Appendix C. APPENDIX D LOCAL SUBDIVISION CONTRIBUTION, PROJECT FINANCING AND EXPENSES SCHEME AND DISBURSEMENT RATIO

  • Innovative/Flexible Scheduling Where the Hospital and the Union agree, arrangements regarding Innovative Scheduling/Flexible Scheduling may be entered into between the parties on a local level. The model agreement with respect to such scheduling arrangements is set out below: MODEL AGREEMENT WITH RESPECT TO INNOVATIVE SCHEDULING/FLEXIBLE SCHEDULING MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT Between: The Hospital - And: The Ontario Public Service Employees Union (and its Local ) This Model Agreement shall be part of the Collective Agreement between the parties herein, and shall apply to the employees described in Article 1 of the Model Agreement.

  • Innovative Scheduling Schedules which are inconsistent with the Collective Agreement provisions may be developed in order to improve quality of working life, support continuity of resident care, ensure adequate staffing resources, and support cost-efficiency. The parties agree that such innovative schedules may be determined locally by the Home and the Union subject to the following principles:

  • Problem Solving Employees and supervisors are encouraged to attempt to resolve on an informal basis, at the earliest opportunity, a problem that could lead to a grievance. If the matter is not resolved by informal discussion, or a problem-solving meeting does not occur, it may be settled in accordance with the grievance procedure. Unless mutually agreed between the Employer and the Union problem-solving discussions shall not extend the deadlines for filing a grievance. The Union Xxxxxxx or in their absence, the Local Union President, or Area Xxxxxxx, or Chief Xxxxxxx, either with the employee or alone, shall present to the appropriate supervisor a written request for a meeting. If the supervisor agrees to a problem- solving meeting, this meeting shall be held within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of the request. The supervisor, employee, Union Xxxxxxx, and up to one (1) other management person shall attempt to resolve the problem through direct and forthright communication. If another member of management is present that person will not be hearing the grievance at Step Two, should it progress to that Step. The employee, the Union Xxxxxxx or in their absence, the Local Union President, or Area Xxxxxxx, or Chief Xxxxxxx, may participate in problem-solving activities on paid time, in accordance with Article 31, Union Rights, Section 1H.

  • Access Toll Connecting Trunk Group Architecture 9.2.1 If CBB chooses to subtend a Verizon access Tandem, CBB’s NPA/NXX must be assigned by CBB to subtend the same Verizon access Tandem that a Verizon NPA/NXX serving the same Rate Center Area subtends as identified in the LERG.

  • Program Interactions with Other HFA Programs Other HFA program benefits may be available to the homeowner provided the HHF program maximum benefit cap of $100,000 has not been exceeded, and program funds are available. The homeowner is required to apply separately for each HFA program.

  • Innovative Unit Scheduling Schedules other than those included in Articles 13.01 and 13.02 may be developed in order to improve quality of working life, support continuity of patient care, ensure adequate staffing resources, and support cost-efficiency. The parties agree that such innovative schedules may be determined locally by the Hospital and the Union subject to the following principles:

  • Foreign-Owned Companies in Connection with Critical Infrastructure If Texas Government Code, Section 2274.0102(a)(1) (relating to prohibition on contracts with certain foreign-owned companies in connection with critical infrastructure) is applicable to this Contract, pursuant to Government Code Section 2274.0102, Contractor certifies that neither it nor its parent company, nor any affiliate of Contractor or its parent company, is: (1) majority owned or controlled by citizens or governmental entities of China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, or any other country designated by the Governor under Government Code Section 2274.0103, or (2) headquartered in any of those countries.

  • Familiarity with Contract Documents Contractor represents that it has reviewed or will review and become familiar with the Contract Documents, not later than the commencement of the construction phase.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.