I thought this was a well written article because the author is informative without being too dry in her descriptions. Blogs do tend to be more conversational and this one is no exception. The academic focus on this relatively historic topic is still present, but the article is written for a wider audience than the academic community.
Embeddable cryptographic processors are enabling a host of new defense communications applications, such as smartphones and tablet computers for tactical use on the front lines, but should soldiers be using the same object for both secure and insecure communications? Or does this create a conflict of interests?