From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. At our inaugural SuperCloud 22 event, we further refined the concept of a SuperCloud, iterating on the definition. The salient attributes and some examples of what is and what is not a SuperCloud. Welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights, powered by ETR. You know, Snowflake has always been what we feel is one of the strongest examples of a SuperCloud. And in this Breaking Analysis from our studios in Palo Alto, we unpack our interview with Benoit D'Avile, co-founder and president of products at Snowflake, and we test our SuperCloud definition on the company's data cloud platform. And we're really looking forward to your feedback. First, let's examine how we define SuperCloud. Very importantly, one of the goals of SuperCloud 22 was to get the community's input on the definition and iterate on previous work. SuperCloud is an emerging computing architecture that comprises a set of services which are abstracted from the underlying primitives of hyperscale clouds. We're talking about services such as compute, storage, networking, security, and other native tooling, like machine learning and developer tools to create a global system that spans more than one cloud. SuperCloud, as shown on this slide, has five essential properties. X number of deployment models and Y number of service models. We're looking for community input on X and Y and on the first point as well, so please weigh in and contribute. Now we've identified these five essential elements of a SuperCloud and let's talk about these. First, a SuperCloud has to run its services on more than one cloud, leveraging the cloud native tools offered by each of the cloud providers. The builder of the SuperCloud platform is responsible for optimizing the underlying primitives of each cloud and optimizing for the specific needs, be it cost or performance or latency or governance, data sharing, security, et cetera. But those primitives must be abstracted such that a common experience is delivered across the clouds for both users and developers. The SuperCloud has a metadata intelligence layer that can maximize efficiency for the specific purpose of the SuperCloud, i.e. the purpose that the SuperCloud is intended for and it does so in a federated model. And it includes what we call a super pass. This is a prerequisite that is a purpose built component and enables ecosystem partners to customize and monetize incremental services while at the same time ensuring that a common experiences exist across clouds. Now, in terms of deployment models, we'd really like to get more feedback on this piece, but here's where we are so far based on the feedback we got at SuperCloud 22. We see three deployment models. The first is one where a control plane may run on one cloud but supports data plane interactions with more than one other cloud. The second model instantiates the SuperCloud services on each individual cloud and within regions and can support interactions across more than one cloud with a unified interface, connecting those instantiations, those instances to create a common experience. And the third model superimposes its services as a layer or in the case of Snowflake, they call it a mesh on top of the cloud. On top of the cloud providers, region or regions with a single global instantiation, of those services which spans multiple cloud providers. This is our understanding from the conversation with Benoit Dajaville as to how Snowflake approaches its solutions. And for now, we're going to park the service models. We need more time to flesh that out and we'll propose something shortly for you to comment on. Now, we peppered Benoit Dajaville at SuperCloud 22 to test how the Snowflake data cloud aligns to our concepts and our definition. Let me also say that Snowflake doesn't use the term data cloud. They really want to respect and they want to denigrate the importance of their hyperscale partners, nor do we. But we do think the hyperscalers today anyway are building or not building what we call SuperClouds but they are, but people who are building SuperClouds are building on top of hyperscale clouds. That is a prerequisite. So here are the questions that we tested with Snowflake. First question. How does Snowflake architect its data cloud and what is its deployment model? Listen to Dajaville talk about how Snowflake has architected a single system. Play the clip. There are several ways to do this, you know, SuperCloud as you name them. The way we picked is to create one single system and that's very important, right? There are several ways, right? You can instantiate your solution in every region of the cloud and potentially that region could be AWS that region could be GCP. So you are indeed a multi-cloud solution. But Snowflake, we did it differently. We are really creating cloud regions which are superimposed on top of the cloud provider, you know, region, infrastructure region. So we are building our regions. But where it's very different is that each region of Snowflake is not one instantiation of our service. Our service is global by nature. We can move data from one region to the other. When you land in Snowflake, you land into one region but you can grow from there and you can, you know, exist in multiple cloud at the same time. And that's very important, right? It's not one single, I mean, different instantiation of a system is one single instantiation which covers many cloud regions and many cloud providers. Snowflake chose the most advanced level of our three deployment models. D'Ajaville talked about two, presumably so it could maintain maximum control and ensure that common experience, like the iPhone model. Next, we probed about the technical enablers of the data cloud. Listen to D'Ajaville talk about snow grid. He uses the term mesh. And then this can get confusing with your Jean-Marc D'Agony's data mesh concept. But listen to Benoit's explanation. Well, as I said, you know, first we start by building, you know, Snowflake regions. We have today three regions that spawn, you know, the world. So it's a worldwide system with many regions. But all these regions are connected together. They are, you know, mesh together without technology. We name it snow grid. And that makes it hard because, you know, regions, you know, Azure region can talk to a WS region or GCP regions. And as a user of our cloud, you don't see really this regional differences that, you know, regions are in different, you know, potentially cloud. When you use Snowflake, you can exist. Your presence as an organization can be in several regions, several clouds if you want, geographic and both geographic and cloud provider. So I can share data irrespective of the cloud. And I'm in the Snowflake data cloud. Is that correct? I can do that today. Exactly. And that's very critical, right? What we wanted is to remove data silos. And when you instantiate a system in one single region, and that system is locked in that region, you cannot communicate with other parts of the world. You are locking data in one region, right? And we didn't want to do that. We wanted, you know, data to be distributed the way customer wants it to be distributed across the world and potentially sharing data at world scale. Now, maybe there are many ways to skin the other cat, meaning perhaps if a platform does instantiate in multiple places, there are ways to share data, but this is how Snowflake chose to approach the problem. Next question. How do you deal with latency in this big global system? This is really important to us because while Snowflake has some really smart people working as engineers and the like, we don't think they've solved for the speed of light problem. They're best people working on it, as we often joke. Listen to Ben Wadajevil's comments on this topic. So yes and no, the way we do it is very expensive to do that because generally if you want to join, you know, data which are in different region and different cloud is going to be very expensive because you need to move data every time you join it. So the way we do it is that you replicate the subset of data that you want to access from one region from other regions. So you can create this data mesh, but data is replicated to make it very cheap and very performant too. And is the Snowgrid, does that have the metadata intelligence to actually perform it? Can you describe that a little bit? Yes, Snowgrid is both a way to exchange metadata so each region of Snowflag knows about all the other regions of Snowflag, every time we create a new region, the metadata is distributed over our data cloud. Not only region knows all the region, but knows every organization that exists in our cloud where this organization is, where data can be replicated by this organization. And then of course it's also used as a way to exchange data. So you can exchange data by scale of data size and we just had, I was just receiving an email from one of our customer who moved more than four petabytes of data cross region, cross cloud providers in few days. And it's a lot of data so it takes some time to move but they were able to do that online, completely online and switch over to the other region, which is failover is very important also. So yes and no probably means typically no. He says yes and no probably means no. So it sounds like Snowflag is selectively pulling small amounts of data and replicating it where necessary. But you also heard him talk about the metadata layer, which is one of the essential aspects of SuperCloud. Okay, next we dug into security. It's one of the most important issues and we think one of the hardest parts related to deploying SuperCloud. So we've talked about how the cloud has become the first line of defense for the CISO but now with multi-cloud, you have multiple first lines of defense and that means multiple shared responsibility models and multiple tool sets from different cloud providers and then expanded threat surface. So listen to Benoit's explanation here, please play the clip. This is a great question. Security has always been the most important aspect of Snowflag since day one, right? This is the question that every customer of ours has, you know, how can you guarantee the security of my data? And so we secure data really tightly in region. We have several layers of security. It starts by encrypting it every data at rest and that's very important. A lot of customers are not doing that, right?  So we are encrypting everything at rest. We are encrypting everything in transit. So a region is very secure. Now, you know, you never, from one region, you never access data from another region, it's not flag. That's why also we replicate data. Now the replication of that data across region or the metadata for that matter is really highly secure. So SnowGrid ensures that everything is encrypted.  So we built, you know, SnowGrid such that it's secure and it will always be secure movement of data. So when we heard this explanation, we immediately went to the lowest common denominator question, meaning when you think about how AWS, for instance, deals with data in motion or data in rest, it might be different from how another cloud provider deals with it. So how does AWS, differences, for example, in the AWS maturity model for various cloud capabilities, you know, let's say they've got a faster Nitro or Graviton, does it, do you have to, how does Snowflake deal with that? Do they have to slow everything else down? Like imagine a caravan cruising, you know, across the desert. So, you know, every truck can keep up. Let's listen. It's a great question. I mean, of course our software is abstracting, you know, all the cloud providers, you know, infrastructure such that when you run in one region, let's say AWS or Azure, it doesn't make any difference as far as the applications are concerned. And this abstraction, of course, is a lot of work. I mean, really, really a lot of work because it needs to be secure. It needs to be performance and, you know, every cloud and it has, you know, to expose APIs which are uniform.  The way, you know, these systems are secure is completely different. The errors that you can get and the retry, you know, mechanism is very different from one cloud to the other. The performance is also different. We discovered that when we were starting to port our software and, you know, we had to completely rethink how to leverage blob storage in that cloud versus that cloud because just of performance too. And so we had, you know, for example, to, you know, Stripe data. So all this work is work that, you know, you don't need as an application because our vision, really, is that application which are running in our data cloud can, you know, be abstracted of all these difference and we provide all the services, all the workload that this application need whether it's transactional access to data, analytical access to data, you know, managing, you know, logs, managing, you know, metrics, all of these is abstracted too such that they are not, you know, tied to one, you know, particular service of one cloud and distributing this application across, you know, many regions, many cloud is very seamless. So from that answer, we know that Snowflake takes care of everything but we really don't understand the performance implications, you know, in that specific case, but we feel pretty certain that the promises that Snowflake makes around governance and security within their data sharing construct will be kept. Now, another criterion that we've proposed for SuperCloud is a super pass layer to create a common developer experience and an enabler for ecosystem partners to monetize. Please play the clip. Let's listen. We build it's, you know, a custom build because as you said, you know, what exists in one cloud might not exist in another cloud provider, right? So we have to build, you know, all these components that's a modern application, modern data application need and that, you know, goes to machine learning, as I said, transactional analytical system and the entire thing so that it can run in isolation basically. And the objective is the developer experience will be identical across those clouds. Yes, the developers doesn't need to worry about cloud provider and actually our system, we have, we didn't talk about it, but the marketplace that we have, which allows actually to deliver. We're getting there. Yeah. Okay. Now, we're not going to go deep into ecosystem today. We've talked about Snowflake's strengths in this regard, but Snowflake, they pretty much ticked all the boxes on our SuperCloud attributes and definition. We asked Ben Waddageville to confirm that this is all shipping and available today. And he also gave us a glimpse of the future. Play the clip.  So they are still, you know, work in progress, but that's the vision, right? And that's important because we talk about the infrastructure, right? You mentioned a lot about storage and compute, but it's not only that, right? When you think about application, they need to use a transactional database. They need to use an analytical system. They need to use, you know, machine learning. So you need to provide also all these services which are consistent across all the cloud providers. So you can hear Dajaville talking about expanding beyond taking advantage of the core infrastructure, storage and networking, et cetera, and bringing intelligence to the data through machine learning and AI. So of course, there's more to come. And there better be at this company's valuation, despite the recent sharp pullback in a tightening fed environment. Okay, so I know it's cliche, but everyone's comparing Snowflakes and Databricks. Databricks has been pretty vocal about its open source posture compared to Snowflakes. And it just so happens that we had Ali Gotzion at SuperCloud 22 as well. He wasn't in studio, he had to do a remote because I guess he's presenting at an investor conference this week. So we had to bring him in remotely. Now I didn't get to do this interview, John Furrier did, but I listened to it and captured this clip about how Databricks sees SuperCloud and the importance of open source. Take a listen to Goatsey. Yeah, let me start by saying we just, we're big fans of open source. We think that open source is a force in software that's going to continue for decades, hundreds of years. And it's going to slowly replace all proprietary code in its way. We saw that it could do that with the most advanced technology. Windows proprietary operating system, very complicated, got replaced with Linux. So open source can pretty much do anything. And what we're seeing with the data lake house is that slowly the open source community is building a replacement for the proprietary data warehouse, data lake, machine learning, real-time stack in open source. And we're excited to be part of it.  And when it comes a really important protocol called Delta Sharing, that enables you in an open way, actually for the first time ever, share large data sets between organizations. But it uses an open protocol. So the great thing about that is you don't need to be a Databricks customer. You don't need to even like Databricks. You just need to use this open source project and you can now securely share data sets between organizations across clouds. And it actually does so really efficiently. Just one copy of the data. So you don't have to copy it if you're within the same cloud. So the implication of Alley Goatsey's comments is that Databricks with Delta Sharing, as John implied, is playing a long game. Now, I don't know if enough about the Databricks architecture to comment in detail, I got to do more research there. So I reached out to my two analyst friends, Tony Baer and Sanjeev Mohan, to see what they thought because they cover these companies pretty closely. Here's what Tony Baer said. Quote, I've viewed the divergent lake house strategies of Databricks and Snowflake in the context of their roots. Prior to Delta Lake, Databricks prime focus was the compute, not the storage layer. And more specifically, they were a compute engine, not a database. Snowflake approached from the opposite end of the pool as they originally fit the mold of the classic database company rather than a specific compute engine per se. The lake house pushes both companies outside of their original comfort zones. Databricks to storage, Snowflake to compute engine. So it makes perfect sense for Databricks to embrace the open source narrative at the storage layer and for Snowflake to continue its walled garden approach. But in the long run, their strategies are already overlapping. Databricks is not a 100% open source company. Its practitioner experience has always been proprietary and now so is its SQL query engine. Likewise, Snowflake has had to open up with the support of Iceberg for open data lake format. The question really becomes how serious Snowflake will be in making Iceberg a first class citizen in its environment that is not necessarily officially branding a lake house but effectively is. And likewise, can Databricks deliver the service levels associated with walled gardens through a more brute force approach that relies heavily on the query engine. At the end of the day, those are the key requirements that will matter to Databricks and Snowflake customers. End quote. That was some deep thought by Tony. Thank you for that. Sanjay Mohan added the following. Quote, open source is a slippery slope. People buy mobile phones based on open source Android but it's not fully open. Similarly, Databricks Delta Lake was not originally fully open source. And even today, its photon execution engine is not. We are always going to live in a hybrid world. Snowflake and Databricks will support whatever model works best for them and their customers. The big question is, do customers care as deeply about which vendor has a higher degree of openness as we technology people do? I believe customers evaluation criteria is far more nuanced than just to decipher each vendor's open source claims. End quote. Okay. So I had to ask Dajaville about their so-called wall garden approach and what their strategy is with Apache, Iceberg. Here's what he said. Iceberg is very important. So just to give some context, Iceberg is an open table format, which was first developed by Netflix and Netflix put its open source in the Apache community. So we embrace that open source standard because it's widely used by many companies and also many companies have really invested a lot of effort in building big data, adobe solution or data like solution and they want to use Snowflake and they couldn't really use Snowflake because all their data were in open format. So we are embracing Iceberg to help these companies move to the cloud. But why we have been re-lengthed with direct access to data? Direct access to data is a little bit of a problem for us and the reason is when you direct access to data, now you have direct access to storage. Now you have to understand, for example, the specificity of one cloud versus the other. So as soon as you start to have direct access to data, you lose your cloud diagnostic layer. You don't access data with API. When you have direct access to data it's very hard to secure data because you need to grant access, direct access to tools which are not protected and you see a lot of hacking of data because of that. So that was not direct access to data is not serving well our customers and that's why we have been re-lengthed to do that because it's not cloud diagnostic, it's you have to code that, you have to, you need a lot of intelligence while API is accessed. So we want open APIs that I guess the way we embrace openness is by open API you access directly data. Here's my take, Snowflake is hedging its bets because enough people care about open source that they have to have some open data format options and it's good optics. And you heard Benoit Dajaville talk about the risks of directly accessing the data and the complexities it brings. Now is that maybe a little fud against Databricks? Maybe, but same can be said for Ali's comments, maybe fudding the proprietoriness of Snowflake. But as both analysts pointed out, open is a spectrum, hey, I remember Unix used to equal open systems. Okay, let's end with some ETR spending data and why not compare Snowflake and Databricks spending profiles? This is an XY graph with net score or spending momentum on the Y axis and pervasiveness or overlap in the dataset on the X axis. This is data from the January survey when Snowflake was holding above 80% net score off the charts. Databricks was also very strong in the upper 60s. Now, let's fast forward to this next chart and show you the July ETR survey data and you can see Snowflake has come back down to Earth. Now, I remember anything above 40% net score is highly elevated, so both companies are doing well, but Snowflake is well off its highs and Databricks has come down somewhat as well. Databricks is inching to the right, Snowflake rocketed to the right post its IPO. And as we know, Databricks wasn't able to get to IPO during the COVID bubble. Allie Goetze is at the Morgan Stanley CEO Conference this week. They got plenty of cash to withstand a long-term recession, I'm told. And they've started the message that they're a billion dollars in annualized revenue. I'm not sure exactly what that means. I've seen some numbers on their gross margins. I'm not sure what that means. I've seen some numbers on their net revenue retention. Again, our reserve judgment until we see an S1. But it's clear, both of these companies have momentum and they're out competing in the market. Well, as always, be the ultimate arbiter. Different philosophies, perhaps. Is it like Democrats and Republicans? Well, it could be, but they're both going after solving data problems.  To paraphrase Ralph Nader, the similarities may be greater than the differences. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to the team from Palo Alto for this awesome super cloud studio build. Alex Meyerson and Ken Schiffman are on production in the Palo Alto studios today. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, get the word out to our community. Rob Hoef is our editor in chief over at Silicon Angle. Thanks to all. Please check out ETR.AI for all the survey data. Remember, these episodes are all available as podcasts wherever you listen, just search, breaking analysis podcasts. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. You can email me at david.volante at siliconangle.com or DM me at dvolante or comment on my LinkedIn posts. And please, as I say, ETR has got some of the best survey data in the business. We track it every quarter and really excited to be partners with them. This is Dave Volante for the CUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on breaking analysis.


Hello everyone, my name is Yao Bin Sen, a final year PhD student in SETU. Today, our talk is On Beyond Birth to Brown Security, leveraging the development of ISO-IC 97971 marks. This is the joint work with Professor Wang. Our talk is divided into four parts. The first one is the instruction of ISO-IC 97971 standard. The second one is the description of our contributions. The sixth one is some details about text and proof for pages. The final one is the conclusion. Message Authenticity Core is the symmetric key primitive to provide integrity and authenticity of messages between two parties. There are many three ways to build a mark. The first one is block-side-for-base. The second one is universal hash function-based. The third one is hash function-based. For block-side-for-base marks, there are some more examples including CBC mark, C mark, P mark, MAC mark. The figure is the extraction of CBC mark. It rest the block-side-for-to produce the final talk. Our focus is the ISO-IC 97971 standard. This is the intentional standard for block-side-for-base marks. There are two versions for this standard. The other one is published in 1999, and the color one is published in 2011. This standard specifies six different variants of CBC marks. It also provides for painting skins. As you can see in this figure, they all use the CBC mark structure. The difference appears at the encryption of the first block or the encryption at the final block. There are four painting skins. For painting skin one, we simply right-painted with several zero to make the lens upstream to be a positive multiple of n. This painting skin is in secure because it allows a trivial feature to attack. For painting skin two, we need to right-painted with a single one and then several zero to make the lens of the string to be a positive multiple of n. For the painting skin three, we need to put the binary representation of the lens upstream at the first block, and then right-painted with several zero to make the new string to be a positive multiple of n. For the painting skin four, if the lens upstream is already a positive multiple of n, then we do nothing. Otherwise, we need to right-painted with a single one and several zero to make the lens upstream to be a positive multiple of n. The painting four is only used in mark algorithm five. As you can see, the six marks in this standard all share a single-part CBC black mark structure. They suffer this kind of structure suffer from burst-a-bong attacks. So the security of the marks in this standard all kept at the burst-a-bong security. However, in practical burst-a-bong security is not always enough, especially in resources constrained environment led with block cycle and pre-e or in legacy application such as financial sector, the triple days are still in usage. For this block cycle, the input size is only 64 bits and the burst-a-bong become 2232, which is somewhat small. There are also two practical attacks by the game and lower net exploit the creation on short block cycle to break the security of TLS and open VPN to achieve a higher-level security less beyond burst-a-bong. It is written in ISO IC 97971-2011 that if a mark algorithm with a higher security level is needed, it is recommended to perform to mark calculation with independent keys and concatenate the results while exploring them. This figure is the illustration of two concatenation combined of two marks. We simply concatenate the result of two marks, which is suggested in this international standard. For our contribution, we present further attack on the concatenation combined. We show burst-a-bong further attack on the concatenation combined of any two marks in ISO IC 97971-2011. In particular, our attacks for the concatenation combined of two marks ex-111 with printing 2 only require three queries. Our attacks thus invented the suggestion in ISO IC 97971-2011 that the concatenation combined cannot be skewed beyond burst-a-bong. We learn root for patches. We revisit the development of ISO IC 97971. In the older version that is published in 1999, you use the EXO combiner into algorithm mark ex-1.5 and mark ex-1.6 to potentially go beyond burst-a-bong. But unfortunately, Zhong et al. proposed a burst-a-bong attack on mark ex-1.5 with printing 2. On the positive side, Yasuda proved that mark ex-1.6 can achieve beyond burst-a-bong security if required 60. But the probable security analysis for mark ex-1.5 is still absent either with printing 3 or even with printing 2. This figure is the illustration of the ISO combiner in the older version which simply accelerates the two attacks to produce a final attack. For our patches, we revisit the impact of the EXO combiner of two marks on ISO IC 97971-2011. Here we only focus on the single key marks in this standard. We show that the EXO combiner of two mark ex-1 is beyond burst-a-bong security with printing 3. The EXO combiner of two mark 1 is also the mark ex-5 in the older version. We then prove that the EXO combiner of two mark 5 is beyond burst-a-bong secure. We also prove that the EXO combiner of two mark ex-1 is beyond burst-a-bong secure with printing 2. Note for the concatenation of two mark ex-1 with printing 2, it can be broken with just three queries. The table is the comparison between the ex-mark 1, ex-mark 5 and other CBC landmarks with beyond burst-a-bong security. For previous mark to achieve beyond burst-a-bong security, it requires ADS 3 keys and for ex-mark 1 and ex-mark 5, it only requires two keys. We then describe some details about tech techs and prove for our patches. For the attack on the concatenation of two mark ex-1 with printing 2, it only requires three queries. Here is the attack procedure. The adversary for the query a single block message M to the concatenation combiner to obtain the tag T1 and T2. It learned query M EXO T2 to obtain the left half of the concatenation T3. He made the third query M EXO T1 to obtain the right half of the concatenation T4. Finally, the adversary can make a forgery. The forgery message is only two blocks. The first block is M, the second block is M EXO T1 EXO T2. And the forgery tag is T3 and T4. The T3 can be obtained from the second query. And the T4 is obtained from the third query. And this forgery tag succeeds with probability 1 and it only requires three queries. For the attack on the concatenation of only two marks with printing 2 or printing 4, we will adopt a multi-collision attack for iterated hash function by John. The main idea of this attack is as follows. If we can find one collision with complexity 2 to the half n, then we can find 2 to the power T messages connecting to one value with complexity T times 2 to the half n. This figure illustrates the main idea of the attack, not for each pass. They all cry to the same value YT. For attack, we first focus on the first pass. That is the left path of concatenation. By using the multi-collision attack, we can find 2 to the power T messages that cry to the same value T1 on the left half. And with the higher probability, among these 2 to the power T messages, there also exists a pair of messages that cry to the same value on the right half. We then can use this for collision to construct a forgery attack. The complexity of this attack is only a birthday bound. For attack on the concatenation of any 2 marks with pathing 3, we need to consider the impact of the length. Seeing the pathing 3, we need to put the boundary representation of the string at the first block and then repeat it with several zeros. To deal with the issue, we append several zeros to each of 2 to the power T messages so that they have some bit lengths at all. And then use the multi-collision attack to construct a forgery. The following procedure is effectively sent as the case with pathing 2 or pathing 4. We also prove that our patriot, the exocombiner, can be beyond birthday bound secure. We prove that the exocombiner of 2 marks every than 1 with pathing 3 can achieve beyond birthday bound security. Here is our theory. Here the queue is the number of queries, error is the largest block length, sigma is the total number of blocks. In our proof, we use the game-playing technique. This technique is developed by Blair and Lagerway. In our case, the adversary needs to distinguish the x-mark 1 from the written function. We use the game calls to simulate the target constructions. These two games are syntactic identical until a bad event happens. We then bound the probability of getting set. By using the fundamental limit of game-playing, the maximum advantage of the adversary can be bounded by the probability of the bad event happens. Here are some details. For some FormatGMI, we denote by x and mu the last input to the block-side for EK1 and block-side for EK2, and y and w the corresponding outputs of the block-side for. The bad event is defined when the output tag is from a random MPS string. The tag is produced by the xor of y and w. The bad event will appear in four cases, according to the freshness of the x and mu. The case A is defined when both x and mu are fresh. The case B is when mu is fresh, but x-clive is previous input to block-side for EK1. The case C is when x is fresh, but mu-clive is previous input to block-side for EK2. The case D is when both x and mu-clives are previous input to the block-side for us. It is easy to analyze the bad event in case A because we can rely on the randomness of y and w. To analyze the bad event in case B, we need to rely on the randomness of w and also the property of the event that x appears in previous input to the block-side for. To analyze the later time, we define by fcp the full collision property. The full collision property is the property of the event that the x, that for to match the MIMJ, the xi-clive is previous input to the block-side for. We will use the full collision name by Blair et al. For any 22 prefix match the MIMJ, the full collision name nicely bounded the collision of the x with a previous input to the block-side for. Then the collision event that x-clive with previous input to block-side for EK1 can be bounded by summing over previous i-1 messages. And then the bad event in case B can be bounded by this term. For the case C and case T, we also use the full collision name and here are our result. Finally, we can summing over the probability of the bad event in these four cases to obtain the PRF advantage of the adversary. This is the beyond-best day bound. We also prove that x so combined up to Mach 5 is beyond-best bound secure. The Mach 5 is also known as C mark in NIN standard. Here is our theory for the x mark 5. This advantage is also beyond-best bound. The PRF for x mark 5 is similar to that for x mark 1. Is that that we need to define additional bad event to include the influence of Machs at 1 and x2, which is produced by the block-side for. We also need to define bad event when Mi is the prefix of MJ. This is to guarantee that the messages are prefix free. Finally, it's our conclusion. In this work, we show a best-day bound fidgety attack on the concatenation combing of any two marks in ISO IAC 971-2011. In particular, our attack on the concatenation combing of two marks algorithm 1 with padding 2 only requires three queries. Our attacks are embedded as the suggestion in ISO IAC 97971-2011. That the concatenation combiner cannot be beyond-best bound secure. We also present a patches. We also show that our patches that the x o combiner can be beyond-best bound secure. We prove that the x o combiner up to Mach 1 in this standard is beyond-best bound secure with padding 3. We also show proof that the x o combiner up to Mach F-5 in this standard is beyond-best bound secure. That's all. Thanks for your listening.


What is going on everybody, it's Stas here. Welcome back to another video. So in this video, we're going to be talking about how to use the RSI indicator, also known as the Relative Strength Index Indicator, to your advantage when you're investing and when you're trading in the stock market. We're also going to be going over a very brief, quick definition of what this is for all you beginners out there that are watching, because I'm sure a lot of you clicked on to this video, because you have no idea what the RSI indicator is.  And we're also going to be showing you, I'm going to be showing you how you can set this up if you are using the think or swim platform. So in brief terms, guys, let's just hop right into it. The RSI indicator is a momentum indicator, right? And you can use this for futures, stocks, ETF indices on the overall markets, you can use this on a lot of different tradable, you know, securities, right? This is something you can use all across the board. And what it's telling us is whether or not a stock ETF future index is overbought, or if it is oversold. And typically, when a stock, let's just use stocks for examples here, if a stock is going up in price, people are buying, buying, buying, pushing that stock up on the RSI level, what we're going to be seeing is typically that stock and the level on the RSI level, it's going to be showing us that that stock is getting closer and closer to the overbought status, meaning it might not be too great of a time to hop in and buy that stock, especially if you're looking to trade it, right? And on the flip side, let's say a stock is being heavily sold, people are selling, selling, selling, pushing the stock's price down, we're going to be getting more and more oversold on the RSI level. That's pretty much in basic terms, you know, what the RSI is showing us, whether a stock is overbought, oversold, or it's somewhere in the middle, you know, roughly in this area. And now that we're talking about it, this down here is the RSI indicator, very, very simple, right? You see, this kind of looks like a stock, right? You see the trend lines here, we're going up, we're going down, we're touching the oversold area, we're going back up to the overbought area. And now we can see these two areas, right? This one bottom line here is the oversold line, which is at the 30 level, right? We can see two numbers here, one being 30, which is the oversold line, and the one on top being 70, which is the overbought line, right? And we can see the lines bouncing in and out really pretty much in between these two levels. And what you need to know about these two levels is, again, whenever a stock is getting sold, sold, sold, we're pushing down towards this 30 line, this 30 yellow line here, that means we're getting more and more oversold in that stock, opening up potentially a better opportunity to buy into that stock. And again, when we're getting bought, bought, bought, the stock's going up, up, up, we're going to be getting closer and closer to the 70 level meaning in terms of the RSI, we're going to be more overbought, making it not the best opportunity to get in in terms of the relative strength index. And of course, we see some situations here where we burst out of those levels, you know, this level in terms of this example here, the SPY, the S&P 500 ETF that I follow, we were at 85, which means we're even more overbought if we're passing that 70 threshold of the overbought side. And again, we can see some dips below the 30 threshold here, which means we're extremely, extremely oversold in terms of the relative strength index. So this is very basic, guys, very, very simple. You just got to keep an eye on these two thresholds. If we're getting closer to the top one, we're overbought. If we're getting closer to the bottom one, we are oversold. And take a look how it correlates to the price of this ETF in particular, right? We can see, you know, look at this when the RSI peeked up to the overbought side. Where was, you know, the candlesticks? Where was the chart? Where was the price of the SPY? Just take a look. We popped up very heavily. We saw a bunch of green days in a row pushing this to the overbought side, right? Remember, when people are buying, buying, buying, pushing up the price, this is getting more and more overextended, more and more overbought on the RSI. And you guys remember back in December of 2018, I sure do remember, the stock market took a massive, massive hit. And we can see that on the RSI, right? We pushed down all the way from about 280 in the SPY down to about 230 in the SPY. And take a look at where the RSI is in this level, right? We pushed all the way down to about 19, which is extremely, extremely oversold. And if we were just, you know, basing our trades, our decisions on the RSI in this time period, you know, this would have been a good time to buy in terms of what the RSI indicator is telling us. And we would have been up a nice amount on this SPY ETF, right? And just take a look at this little, little give back here or really the push back up that we saw more towards the middle of December. We sold off aggressively. Again, we can see that in the RSI. And then as we started to see some buying power pushing up the markets, we started to see the RSI back into the medium territory where it's not too overbought, but it's also not too oversold. And then when we started to get rejected by our moving average resistance here, this 50 simple moving average resistance, which is a simple moving average, that's a whole nother topic for a whole nother video, we started to see the RSI again pushing us down to the more oversold territory. So that is a quick little synopsis of what it is. And that is one example, just taking a look at the SPY. So how do you set this up on think or swim? Very basic. You come here to the studies tab, you click edit studies. And this is where you can add all of your different indicators in terms of what I use, I use again, an EMA line, two simple moving averages. I have a MACD set up. And this is what you see here. This is the RSI level. And you can set this up however you want it. I have it towards the bottom of my screen, but let's say you want to have it here, you can simply just flip it like that. And it will change it up for you, right? You can really set this up very custom based however you guys want it. And to get the RSI, let me just do it for you guys really quickly here. It's very simple. You see here studies, strategies, sets. You can set your own set here. And you know, it has custom indicators to the way you want it.  But that's again, a whole nother topic for a whole nother video. But for the RSI, very simple.  And where is it here guys? Where is it here? Boom. You click that. And this is it guys, pretty much it, right? RSI, you double hit it. It brings it over here to the lower tab.  And then you click OK. And then there it is, right? And then you can just adjust the size of these so you can see them better and nice and, you know, clear and easy however you guys want to do it. And that is pretty much how you set up the RSI level on Thinkor Swim and a very just brief definition of what it is and how you can use it, right? So let's just take a look at some other stocks very, very quickly so we can get some more examples under our belt. So let's just take a look at Apple because Apple is one of the most popular stocks out there in the stock market. A lot of people like talking about Apple, right? So let's just use Apple as an example here again when we're getting overbought. The price is going up and up and up as we were here back towards the end of January into February. We went from $154 all the way up to $174. Just take a look at how oversold or rather overbought the RSI got. And from there, we took a nice little dump. And when the RSI dumps, you know, back towards this middle level and we see a support on, let's say, a previous resistance level or on a moving average indicator and the RSI is showing us being at a pretty good level here, this could indicate a good time to hop into a stock, right? And we can see, you know, if you were to buy here and hold it throughout a couple of weeks, this was a pretty good time to buy based on the RSI and especially because we were holding old resistances as new supports. And again, we can see from the dump at $175 down to about $169, that brought the RSI level down from about $62 all the way to $26, which again is extremely, extremely oversold. And from there, we ended up bouncing on an old resistance as a new support again and the 180SMA support here. And we started to climb back up very heavily. And this was recently, and we saw that the RSI yet again got very, very overbought. And what did we see yesterday, guys? I know you guys saw this. This was either two or three days before I'm recording this video. Apple stock was at $95 or $195 rather, very overbought. And we saw a nice little retracement down to about $185 on this old resistance as a new support. And that brought down the RSI level. We're holding the 50SMA as a support right now. So this, the RSI right now is showing how Apple could be at a pretty good buying point, especially since it is holding on other support levels here like the 50 moving average and an old resistance as a new support. And one thing I want to tell you guys in this video, don't just rely on one indicator to make your decisions. Did you just see how I was saying how the RSI is oversold here? But we're also maintaining levels of support. That's me relying on two or three different indicators to make my decisions. Don't always just say or think, rather, just because a stock is oversold, that is a good time to buy no matter what. That is not the way to do it. But you got to use indicators with other indicators with some fundamental analysis with some other analysis to make your decisions. Don't just base them on one indicator because that's just not how it's going to work well for you. Because there's many times when, let's say, for example, NEO stock, this is one that I know is extremely oversold right now, but it doesn't seem like it's a good time to buy in terms of other indicators. We're still getting rejected by the 50 Simple Moving Average here. We're still downtrending, getting rejected by the EMA. Although the RSI is showing how it's very, very oversold, this might not be the best time to get in due to it being still on a downward trending pattern, still being like a falling knife pattern here, making it a little bit tricky, a little bit risky to get in here. But let's say we started to break out of this resistance, we started to make higher lows, we started to use hold the 50 Simple Moving Average as a support rather than a resistance, and the RSI started to come up a bit. That's me using multiple indicators to make my decision to hop into the trade, and that might be a better time to get in. The moral of the story is don't just use one indicator, use a couple of indicators in unison to make your decisions, right? So the RSI, very brief recap, shows you whether or not a stock is overbought or oversold. It's a momentum indicator telling you, okay, if a stock's overbought, this might not be the best time to hop in, maybe you should consider selling or taking your profits. But let's say a stock is oversold, this might mean that, okay, this might be a good time to consider taking a position, maybe starting to trade a stock. So that's pretty much it for this video, guys. I really hope you did enjoy it. What is a relative strength index? I hope you guys did get some value out of this. If you did, feel free to hit that like button to support the channel. Drop a comment. Let me know what you guys think about this. If you have any video suggestions, drop them down below in the comment section. Subscribe to the channel if you're new. I do make videos every single day on stocks I'm trading, stock market updates, stuff like that, stock news. If you're interested, again, subscribe to the channel. I also have two links down below, 100% free Discord group chat and a 100% free Facebook group. Get into those if you are interested as well. And thank you all for watching. I appreciate you taking your time to watch this video. I'll see you all in the next video.


I'm very concerned, in fact, sometimes angry about what I see happening, you know, to young men and women who are arrested or in some cases maimed or killed, you know, by men of the police force and, you know, in some cases those who man tactical units of the police force such as SARS and the other different tactical units that there are. It is, it is, it is completely objectionable, it's unacceptable, you know, these are individuals who are meant to protect the Nigerians, you know, they arrest and they arrest maiming, killing of young people of anyone at all, you know, by these same individuals is completely wrong. It is unlawful, it's illegal and anybody, all of those who are involved in this ought to be investigated and prosecuted. Now I'm sure that today, this afternoon, I had a meeting with the IGO police, we reviewed several of these issues. The president, and I have had discussions on this, is very, very concerned about it, wants to see himself, wants to see a reform of this process and I'm sure that you are probably aware that the police have issued a statement, the IG has issued a statement, looking at all these various issues, in particular, you know, warning against the use of these tactical forces such as SARS for purposes of doing anything other than anti-robbery, as it's supposed to be. I mean, for example, and I think in the statement specifically said that you cannot have a situation where SARS say they investigate in cyber crime and arresting people, young men and women who are carrying laptops and their phones, you know, cyber crime is an electronic crime, there's no way that you can investigate that by seizing people's phones in a taxi or in their cars. So I think it's very obvious that this is a major concern, a few bad eggs within the police force, causing a lot of these and because it's all over the place in different states, there's a need of course to take serious action. I think that the IG statement today is a good first step. He has, you know, clearly said that you cannot even, you must be dressed properly, you must wear police uniform, you can't say because you belong to a tactical unit of the police, you can dress in your casual clothing armed with a gun because people can't even tell the difference between robbers and police if you are not dressed in the proper uniform. So I think that clearly a reform is in the often and from the IG statement today I think it's very clear that steps have been taken and that we must follow this through. So I'd like to encourage civil society activists, young men and women who bring this regularly by the way to the attention of government and the police and I think that that activism is important because they've been able to bring a lot of these killings and a lot of the illegal activities that you referred to through the attention of the police and to the attention of the government and that's an important part of the process of reform. I think that we all have to work together to ensure that our police and law enforcement agents do what their duty is, their duty is to protect us and protect our society, protect our livelihoods, our homes, etc. And by the way many of them are doing an excellent job of that but there are some of them who are engaged in these activities. What is important for us all to see this as something we all have to work together to achieve on the part of individuals, on the part of young men and women to bring to the attention of the police and to the attention of government where they have been violations and on the part of government and the police to ensure that every one of those allocations is properly investigated. Those found responsible are prosecuted and it is publicized so that people know that prosecution has taken place. This is the consequence. I think that those are very important indeed but it's an evolving process and you know I'm very very confident that we'll have a reform police force and that that process has already begun.


I knew it was feasible to make money from the markets. I just didn't understand how to do it. And so I networked as I had done as a headhunter and through contacts got introduced to a guy who became my mentor. He basically, you know, taught me the process of trading. He asked me about, you know, how I got to where I was and I explained and, you know, I told him about the money and stuff. And he said, are you angry? And I hadn't really thought whether or not I mean it, you know, it was, it was a meaningful sum of money, but I was fortunate I still had capital. You know, I wasn't, I wasn't broke, but I didn't think it through. And I, and when I thought about it after the call, I thought, yeah, I'm really pissed off. You know, this has impacted me badly.


Hi guys, my name is Roz with Autodesk and in today's video, we'll be explaining the sync with eBay button on your active listings page. So it's always best to make all of your eBay listing changes directly through Autodesk, because that way Autodesk is always aware of the change. Please note that Autodesk cannot check if you've made a price or quantity change to your item directly on eBay. However, if you've ended the listing directly on eBay or eBay has ended it for you, you can't force a scan that will check for ended listings using the sync with eBay button at the top of your active listings page. Once we manually trigger the sync, it will take up to three hours to complete matching the number of active listings on eBay with the number on Autodesk. Please keep in mind that if you have variation items, there will still be a difference between your active listings count on eBay and on Autodesk. As Autodesk counts each variation for your items on your active listings, as each variation has its own price and stock to be monitored. Additionally, if you've recently uploaded listings in bulk to your store, please wait at least three hours before clicking on the sync with eBay button. As uploading listings in bulk and then immediately clicking on the sync with eBay button might result in many untracked listings. Meaning the items will not be monitored. You'll be able to see them on the untrack tab and it will be necessary to sync them again into active listings. As we said to avoid this, please wait at least three hours after you upload items in bulk and before you click on the sync with eBay button. Please note that after pressing sync with eBay, the button will be grayed out for a period of three hours until synchronization is complete. So if you've ended the listing on eBay and you still see it on your active listings page, simply click on the sync with eBay button. And that's it. Synchronization started. I hope you have enjoyed this quick explanation of the sync with eBay button on your active listings page. If you have any additional questions or you need any assistance, please contact us directly at the customer support chat on the bottom right side of the screen. Thank you so much for watching and have a wonderful day.


All right, good afternoon, everyone. A few things here at the top. I'll get right to your questions. First, I'd like to take a moment to echo some of the points made earlier today by Secretary Austin during his remarks at Senate testimony. As the secretary said, the department has submitted an urgent supplemental budget request to help fund America's national security needs to stand by our partners and invest in our defense industrial base. We're requesting $10.6 billion to help Israel defend itself, $44.4 billion to help Ukraine continue to defend itself against Russia's ongoing aggression, and $3.3 billion to meet US military requirements and our submarine industrial base and to fulfill our AUKUS commitments. During his testimony, the secretary thanked the senators for their bipartisan support to ensure that we can defend America and stand by the allies and partners who magnify our strength. Now, when it comes to the situation in the Middle East, Secretary Austin highlighted that first and foremost, we will continue to protect American forces and our citizens in the region. Second, we will continue to flow critical security assistance to Israel. Our focus is on providing air defense capabilities, precision guided munitions, and more interceptors for the Iron Dome system. Third, we're coordinating closely with the Israelis to help secure the release of the hostages held by Hamas, including American citizens. Secretary Austin highlighted that we immediately provided US military advisors to offer best practices for integrating hostage recovery into Israel's operations. And finally, we've strengthened our force posture across the region to deter any state or non-state actors from escalating this crisis beyond Gaza to include the presence of two carrier strike groups currently in the region. Moving to other updates, today I can announce the decision to deploy an additional 300 troops to the US Central Command region from home stations in the continental United States. These additional troops will provide capabilities and explosive ordinance disposal, communications, and other support enablers for forces already in the region. Please note that we will not discuss specific deployment locations for these forces, but I can confirm they are not going to Israel and that they are intended to support regional deterrence efforts and further bolster US force protection capabilities. Separately, Secretary Austin continues to remain in close contact with his Israeli counterpart. He spoke with Israeli Minister of Defense Yov Galant yesterday by phone and received updates on Israel's phased operations in Gaza. The Secretary commended the Israel Defense Forces commitment to hostage recovery and re-emphasized the importance of conducting operations in accordance with the law of war. He also stressed the imperative to protect innocent civilians and allow unfettered humanitarian aid into Gaza. We have posted a readout of the call on the DOD website. Shifting gears later this afternoon, Secretary Austin will welcome his Australian counterpart, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defense Richard Marles, to the Pentagon to discuss the United States-Australia Alliance and review progress on defense initiatives following the 2023 Australia-US ministerial consultations earlier this summer. We will share a readout following the meeting. Also this afternoon, Dr. Sean Kirkpatrick, the Director of the All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or ARRO, will be discussing the status of the ARRO website and the next phase of the secure mechanism for contacting ARRO to report on unidentified anomalous phenomena or UAP. Additional details can be found in the press advisory published earlier today. And I would encourage any media interested in asking questions on this topic to take part in Dr. Kirkpatrick's briefing. And separately tomorrow, a pre-scheduled operational test launch of a US Air Force Global Strike Command on our redundancy and reliability of our strategic deterrence system while sending a visible message of assuring allies. For any further questions, I'd refer you to Air Force Global Strike Command. And finally, I'd like to take a moment to send General Eric Smith, Commandant of the Marine Corps, well wishes and a speedy recovery on behalf of Secretary Austin and the entire Department of Defense. Our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family. And with that, I'll be happy to take your questions. We'll go to Tara Kopp, associated for us. General Roder, in the days since the loosened shooting, it's come to light that the Army determined that the main reservist shouldn't have had a gun at the time. And there's been numerous other warning signs about him. Is the Pentagon looking at all at maybe something that was missed or a way to maybe further tighten reporting to law enforcement in the wake of this attack? Yeah, thanks, Tara. So I'm not aware of any specific departmental efforts as it relates to this individual case. What I would say is that for service members who are departing the service or service members who are even still in the service, but in particular those departing, we do offer a wide variety of services as part of that transition process to include medical and mental health care services. Once a service member leaves, he or she is, of course, a private citizen. And when appropriate, certainly the DOD would consult with local law enforcement. In this particular case, the individual, of course, was in the Army Reserve, so I'd refer you to them for any further questions. All right. And further, can you give us an update? Has there been any additional attacks on US bases in Iraq and Syria in the last 24 hours? Is the total still 23, I think? So, again, we'll continue to keep you updated. What I'm tracking right now is since our self-defense strikes on 26 October, there have been six additional, what I would consider, small-scale attacks, three in Iraq, three in Syria. Right now, we're tracking a total of 27 attacks, 16 in Iraq, 11 in Syria. Again, as we see the data minor alerts pop up, we check each of those with CENCOM, go back to verify the information. And as that information is either verified or batted down, we'll make sure to let you know. Did any of those actually hit the bases or are they all intercepted? In some cases, they just didn't strike anything. Yeah. Again, to my knowledge, no injuries, no damaged infrastructure. OK, thanks very much. Yes, sir. General, you have discussed about these attacks, the need to keep the response specifically to them isolated to the anti-ISIS coalition and how that's separate from what's going on in Gaza. But we have seen such an increase over the past couple of weeks. Does the Department acknowledge at least a link of what's spurring these attacks? Is the US's support for Israel? Yeah, so I think it's important to differentiate between what Iranian proxies and Iran might be saying and the perspective that we bring to this, which is our forces are in Iraq and Syria for one purpose, which is the enduring defeat of ISIS. That's why they're there. That's what they'll stay focused on. So this is separate and distinct from the situation in Israel between Israel and Hamas. And so, again, our message is we will take whatever necessary actions to protect those forces, to deter future attacks. And if and when we need to respond, we would do so at a time and place of our choosing. If they are separate, what has led to the increase in attacks over the past couple of weeks? Well, certainly this is not the first time we've seen these Iranian proxy groups do these kinds of things for a multitude of purported various reasons. So that in and of itself is not unusual. And again, we'll do what we need to do to protect our troops. And you said you're going to hold them accountable. Do you have a sense of how involved the Iranian government is in these attacks or are they simply just not communicating for these groups to hold off or do they even have that power? Yeah, we know that these groups are funded, trained, sponsored by the Iranian government and we hold the Iranian government responsible for that. Let me go to the phone here, Tony from Bloomberg.  Two quick questions. Roughly how much presidential drawdown authority do you have left now for Ukraine? And I had a second question about the Persian Gulf. Yeah, sure. So right now we have a little more than $5.4 billion in restored PDA authority that remains available for Ukraine. And Persian Gulf is the United States increasing its force posture or protection measures in the Gulf to protect international shipping from Iranian small boat harassment attacks if in fact they occur. Well, Tony, we have those forces in the region for a variety of things to include helping to protect the shipping lanes and free flow of commerce through the region. And we've been doing that for a very long time. So certainly that is a capability that we can provide working alongside our partners in the region. We'll continue to do that. Thank you. John. Thanks for your writer. You mentioned that the US is providing munitions to Israel. Does that include ordering munitions like the switch blades or Phoenix goes that the US is providing to Ukraine? Yeah, so beyond what I've already provided, I don't have any additional support to announce. Again, we're focused on artillery, ammunition, precision guided munitions, and air defense capabilities. And with regard to air and missile defense in the Middle East, is the US providing any directed energy air and missile defense systems to US troop locations in the Middle East that have come under attack to kind of augment their traditional air defense capabilities? So I don't want to go into the specific capabilities that we're using to protect our forces other than to say we have a wide variety, which does include directed energy capabilities. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you, General. I have two questions. Under clarity of the US extended deterrence to South Korea, what is the Pentagon's assessment of the US in South Korea? Join research report on the strengthening nuclear guarantees for South Korea, which aims to redeploy US nuclear weapons in a feasible way if North Korea refuses to freeze nuclear weapons production. I'm sorry, Janie. Can you repeat that last part I didn't fully understand? I want to make sure I get your question right. I mean, which aims to redeploy US nuclear weapons in a feasible way if North Korea refuses to nuclear product weapons? Yeah, so I don't want to get into hypotheticals. We've been very clear in terms of our commitment to extended deterrence, working very closely with our Republic of Korea allies, our Japanese allies, and others in the region to deter. And we continue to stay very focused on that. We'll continue to consult closely to make sure that we have the forces in theater to be able to prevent any type of issue like you highlight, so I'll just leave it at that. Thank you very much. The Defense Ministers of China and Russia present military cooperation between the two countries at a recent conference in Beijing. And they branded the United States for the Middle East crisis, saying that it was due to US 40 diplomacy. Why do China and Russia say that the war between Israel and Hamas is because of the United States? I'll let China and Russia speak for themselves. I think their record speaks for itself. Vadi. Thank you, General. So on the US assistance to Israel, can you date us on how many shipments you have delivered at the price tag of these shipments so far? I cannot. I don't have that information in front of me. As you know, we continue to provide assistance to Israel pretty much on a daily basis, and we'll continue to stay focused on communicating them as far as what their needs are. In the future, if we have that information and we're able to provide it, we certainly will. But as of right now, I don't have that. I mean, is it an issue of collecting how much you sent, or is it something else? Because in the case of Ukraine, whenever there's a new package of assistance, the Pentagon announces what's in it and the price tag. So this is being offered in the name of American taxpayers and American people. Yeah, no, very, yeah. You know what's been offered. Again, I don't have that information in front of me. As appropriate, we'll provide it. Certainly, right now, there's an element of operation security and the mechanisms by which we're providing assistance to Israel from a policy and a legal standpoint are a little bit different. And from a budgetary standpoint, a little bit different than the way we're providing aid to Ukraine. And so, you know, again, we will make sure that we're as transparent as possible, while also recognizing that there are operation security aspects to this. But like I said, if at an appropriate point in time, we have that information to provide and we're able to, we will. So you'll try to offer the information when if. Yeah, but I mean, we've been very clear in terms of the kinds of capabilities we're providing in terms of the types of munitions, medical support, air defense support and those kinds of things. And if I may, the IDF spokesperson on CNN with Wolfritzer minutes ago acknowledged that Israel targeted Jabalia refugee camp where scores of civilians have been killed. The IDF spokesman said, this is the tragedy of war. What we've been saying for days moves out. Your own department is saying there are no restrictions on Israel how to use weapons provided by the U.S. The secretary today in his tweet about his phone call with Mr. Galan said he re-emphasized the safety of civilians. Wouldn't the idea of putting some restrictions on how Israel used the weapon actually achieve the target of making sure civilians aren't being killed the way we're seeing it? I mean, the other way is saying, this is a quote, Gaza has become a graveyard for thousands of children. Yeah, thanks, Fadi. So I can't speak to individual Israeli strikes. I've seen the repressed reports on that. I don't have any information on that. You heard Secretary Austin say today that taking civilian safety into account is both a moral and a strategic obligation. And we do care about civilian casualties and we've made it both clear publicly and privately about our concern for the protection of innocent life and the respect for the law of war. And that's not gonna change. But I also think it's important to not forget about the common denominator here, which is Hamas, which is a terrorist organization that has taken a page out of the ISIS playbook in terms of brutality and wanton disregard for civility and for human rights. And not only did they commit a horrific slaughter of Israeli civilians and take more than 200 hostages to use as bargaining chips, but they've willfully and deliberately integrated their operations, their command and control nodes, armories, rockets targeting Israel among the innocent, Gaza population, thus in effect employing them as human shields. And so it's Hamas using Palestinians as human shields that is creating this extra challenge for Israel as they conduct their operations. And we're gonna of course continue to talk to our Israeli partners about the importance of taking civilian safety into account as they conduct their operations. But we also recognize that they have a responsibility and a duty to their citizens to protect their citizens from future Hamas attacks. And we're gonna continue to support them in that effort. And as you heard, Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken talk about today, the US government is also going to continue to work very closely with other partners as well as vetted NGOs to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza, to the Palestinians, because again, no one wants to see innocent people suffering whether they be Palestinian or Israeli. Thank you. Yes, Joe. Thank you, General. I wanna go back to the Houthis attack against Israel. Do you have any additional information in regards to this attack? You could share it with us. Was it a missile or a UAV? And also, does the Pentagon consider the Houthis activities right now as a threat to Israel or it could be extended to the whole region? Yeah, thanks, Joe. So I'll tell you what I know. Right now, we are aware that the Houthis did fire a medium range ballistic missile or cruise missile to targeting Israel. Israel did take it down. The IDF did take it down. And so I certainly refer you to the IDF to talk about that in particular. This is something that we will continue to monitor as we've said before. We want to prevent a broader regional conflict. We will continue to stay in close contact with our partners in the region to make sure that we continue to do that. That's all I've got on that at this point. Thank you very much. The big difference between a ballistic missile and a cruise missile, which did you say? This was a, I'll have to come back to you, David. I don't want to get it wrong. But we know that they have missile, as I've mentioned before, they have missiles that can range approximately 2,000 kilometers. So clearly within range of Israel. Yes, sir. Thank you. So today, Secretary Carson said that if you guys stop supporting Ukraine Russia will succeed in Ukraine. Do you have additional options for supporting Ukraine's military in case if Congress does not approve new funding now or in the future? Yeah, so at this point, I appreciate the question. I don't want to get into the hypotheticals. We will continue to work closely with Congress to get the funding that we need. We're confident that we can continue to support both Ukraine and Israel. Go on more in Ukraine. Could you provide us with the updates on the training in Arizona on F-16s and how long approximately can it take for the pilots to complete the course? Sure, let me just double check here. So right now, what we expect graduation completion will be dependent on the individual proficiency of pilots themselves, but we can estimate about five to nine months for them to complete that training. Five to nine? Five to nine. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Thank you very much, General. The United States has been providing military guidance and assistance and also lethal assistance to Israel.  But also there are statements coming from both the Secretary of State and also the White House that there's no conditions set on the use of ammunition and the U.S. is not drawing any bread lines, quote unquote. Would you say that it's basically a blank check to the Israeli military to do whatever they want because there is support from the United States and there's no conditions set? And would you say that it's time to perhaps stop warning about warning them about consequences rather than recommendations? Well, I think Secretary Austin did talk about his consultation with his Israeli counterpart and again across the board about the importance of taking civilian safety into account in order to think through the second third order effects here, right? And so again, we're providing these munitions to Israel to support their efforts to protect their civilians from further terrorist attacks. The Israeli Defense Forces are a professional military. They're engaged in a campaign to defeat ISIS and prevent them from doing what they did on October 7th. And as we've said, we support their right to defend themselves against terrorism but in a way that upholds the laws of war and protects civilians. And so again, as I highlighted earlier, the challenge in all of this is the fact that you see Hamas embedding themselves among the Ghazan population. And so again, we're gonna continue to relay to our Israeli partners that they must distinguish between terrorist and innocent civilians as they root out Hamas and they've acknowledged that. Thank you. Sounds like a valid point that Hamas is using these civilians as human shields. That's why there are these casualties but we're talking about thousands of civilians. So are you able to pick out the ones that the Israelis are saying, okay, I mean, they're right. They've been used as human shields and in disaster strikes specifically, no, they actually haven't upheld the laws of war. Is the DOD able to make that differentiation? Well, look, I'll let the Israelis speak to their own specific operations. We know that they're not deliberately targeting civilians unlike Hamas which did deliberately target civilians and is deliberately using civilians as human shields. And so again, this is what creates a very challenging operational environment. And again, for our part, we will continue to communicate the importance of taking the laws of war into account as well as protecting civilians. Let me go to the phone here, Jared from Elmonator. Hey, sir, just wondering if you can confirm the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit and the Amphibious Ready Group. Are they in the Eastern Med yet? So Jared, what I can tell you right now is they're still in the U.S. Central Command AOR, Air Responsibility. Beyond that, I don't have any updates to provide. If and when there are, we'll certainly let you guys know when we can. Thank you. Let me go to Lara Seligman, Politico. Hey, Pat, thanks for this. Two questions. First of all, has Secretary Austin spoken with the new House Speaker? Yet, there's a couple of things I imagined he'd be wanting to talk about including aid for Ukraine and then I have a follow-up. Yeah, thanks, Lara. I will have to get back to you on that. Certainly, the Secretary's on the Hill today. I do not know if he had the chance while he was there to engage with the House Speaker. So we'll come back to you on that one. Okay, thank you. And then a different question. There was just a story from the New York Times saying that Chris Mayer said that there were U.S. Special Operations Forces currently in Israel trying to help locate the hostages. I'm just wondering if that is accurate or are the Special Operations Forces the ones that were just offering advice to the Israelis and are not gone? Right, my understanding is that these forces are there supporting the advice and intelligence support as it relates to hostage recovery. Thank you. Ro. Thank you very much. One quick question on North Korea. North Korea said that they will conduct military satellite launch by the end of October, but they didn't. So does the Pentagon assess their technical issues that North Korea has to resolve for successful satellite launch or do you see indications that North Korea is still preparing to conduct satellite launch in the near future? Yeah, thanks, Ro. I appreciate the question. I'm not going to go into intelligence on what we may or may not know as it relates to that. Certainly something we will continue to monitor. Thank you very much. Time for a few more. Wafa, and then we'll come here, yes, sir. Yesterday, a junior defense official said that the administration is asking tough questions. Of course, asking Israel tough questions. If you can elaborate on this, and especially that doesn't seem like Israel is taking these advices and I have another question. Sure. As I highlighted, I mean, we are asking in our consultations, like good friends do, and highlighting the importance of being methodical in terms of targeting, taking into account civilian safety, thinking through second, third order effects, as I've highlighted. Again, at the end of the day, these are Israel's operations that they are taking to defend themselves against a future terrorist attack, like the one they experienced. And they're the ones that are gonna make decisions. We're not directing, advising them on any of that. But again, we'll continue to have those conversations going forward. Yes, ma'am. So Hamas is not a conventional army, as you know. And in fact, it's part of the population in Gaza. And it's unlike ISIS and Al Qaeda is considered, Hamas is considered as a resistant movement by a majority in the Arab world. My question is, from a military point of view, how is it possible to destroy or eliminate Hamas without eliminating an entire population in Gaza? Yeah, so we don't see the Palestinians as Hamas and as Hamas as the Palestinians. And again, I'd go back to October 7th when a terrorist organization essentially killed in cold blood, 1400 people and took 200 hostages. Again, using those hostages today as a bargaining chip, preventing people from leaving Gaza. So if you're so-called governing these people, but preventing them from leaving Gaza, you know, again. So it is a terrorist group like ISIS. And it is the kinds of thing you saw in places like Raqqa and Mosul, where there was a population that was being held by an ideological captor. And so again, we are very focused on making sure that not only does Israel have what it needs to defend itself, but also making sure that Palestinian, innocent Palestinians can get the aid that they need. And looking forward, and again, from this podium, Department of Defense, I'm not gonna get into the diplomatic or political realm, but we are interested in what does this look like afterwards and how do we get to a two-state solution so that Palestinians and Israelis can live safely and securely without the threat of being subjugated by a group like Hamas. Thank you. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Two questions. One, as far as Hamas attack, a surprise attack against Israel on October 7th. They didn't care who they were killing, civilians or non-civilians. Now, Israel have a challenge, as you said, that how to separate civilians from these terrorists. Another thing is that where is the Palestinian government in this war, as far as Israel's war against terrorists on their land. And whenever they're attacked by terrorists, whether it's against the U.S. or India or Israel, those nations, except the East or the West, we call them terrorists, but they call them they are freedom fighters. So where is it? So as it relates to the Palestinian Authority, I'd refer you to them to talk about where they stand on this issue. And in terms of the definition between freedom fighter and terrorist group, I get what you're saying. But any moral high ground was lost on October 7th, when 1400 innocent civilians, many of them innocent civilians killed, hostages taken, and so again, that's not the conduct of a professional military that's looking to defend a population. And let me go ahead and move on to the phone here. Patty, task and purpose. I guess it's kind of a bigger question. How is the Pentagon seeing the operations in the Middle East? I mean, are we, what's the operational threshold for us being considered at war? We're seeing movement of troops, movement of military assets, and threats on U.S. troops. So I guess where, how does the Pentagon see all this? Yeah, thanks Patty. So again, I think if we take a step back here, right now we see this conflict in Israel contained to Israel between Israel and Hamas. We do recognize there are broader tensions in the region as a result of that, which is why we have deployed additional capabilities into the Eastern Mediterranean and into the U.S. Central Command Area of Responsibility to provide us with the options necessary to respond to a wide variety of contingencies. So those forces are really there for two things. One, to deter any escalation of a broader regional conflict, which no one wants national security work like the Defeat ISIS mission, like keeping the lanes of shipping open and with regional partners on air defense and things like that. So again, right now we are working very hard to prevent this from becoming a broader regional conflict. We're working very hard to make sure that our forces can continue to stay focused on their mission, while at the same time supporting Israel and their fight to defend themselves from terrorism. All right, that time for just a couple more. Mike. Yes, sir, thanks, Pat. You said that the IDF is a professional military. You know they're not deliberately targeting civilians. Yet it seems like every time somebody from the Pentagon calls Israel, they have to sort of stress not to target civilians and not to, or feel the need to remind them to act in accordance with the law of war. Has Israel done anything that would lead this building to assume that it's an alien concept to them?  And also, I don't recall this emphasis on any of this military support for Ukraine. That he has, did he have to constantly remind his Ukrainian counterpart to follow the rule of law of war in Ukraine? Yeah. Or is it just Israel? Thanks, Mike. So I'm not gonna compare and contrast the conflicts in Ukraine and Israel. I think we've all watched how those have played out. I think at the risk of coming across is, and I don't mean this to come across like I don't understand what you're asking. Clearly, everyone's watching the television and seeing the situation as it plays out in terms of humanitarian situation in Gaza. We recognize that. So you and other members of the press can ask very legitimate questions in terms of what is the Department of Defense saying and doing as it relates to that situation. So that is why we're highlighting the fact that these conversations are taking place because it is a topic on people's minds. And it's a legitimate topic. And again, as I mentioned, we recognize the complexity of this conflict. We recognize the emotion surrounding this conflict, but we also think it's important to have a broader understanding of why we're supporting Israel, why it's important to support Israel, but at the same time, why it's important to also help with the humanitarian situation in Gaza and to sort of see through the smoke screen here that Hamas is attempting to put up when it comes to the situation. So that's what I would have to offer you on that. All right, let me go to the last question. We'll do John and then actually we'll go to Jim. Thanks, I just want to get a quick clarification on something. You said that U.S. air and missile defenses in the Middle East include directed energy weapons. Were those systems that had already been deployed there? I said we have a wide variety in our inventory of the U.S. military that includes directed energy weapons. I didn't say specifically what we've got employed and where. So you won't say whether they're in the Middle East? Yeah, at this time, I'm just not going to go into what we're using and how we're using it. I mean, you and I have both been over there quite a few times. You've seen we've got a variety of capabilities to include sea whiz and things like that. So I'm just not going to go through a breakdown, especially while we have forces that are over there right now. So last question, Jim. General, I'd just like to go over to Ukraine a little bit. It's winter in Ukraine now. Are operations slowing down? What are the Ukrainians selling you? And the training that the United States and the coalition put together for the Ukrainian units in Germany and in other places. Is that contingent on the supplemental being passed also? I'm just curious. Yeah, thanks, Jim. So again, when it comes to providing an operational update, I'd refer you to the Ukrainians. I would say, largely speaking, what we see are the Ukrainians making some incremental gains. They are making forward progress. We are seeing, in some places, the Russians attempting offensive operations with limited effect. I think NSC provided a briefing the other day that talked about some of the issues there. All that to say, though, you do see the Russians attempting to move forward in some areas. And so again, right now, we continue to stay focused on making sure that Ukraine has what it needs in order to capitalize on the situation, have the battlefield effects that are necessary to not only preserve territory, but take back sovereign territory. As in regards to training, we are continuing to conduct training at Grafenvere. I will have to get back to you, though, in terms of the specifics on how far out that training will go. But certainly, the supplemental funding will support those efforts for the long term. I think the last thing I'd say on this, and it's an important point, is we're not only focused on the near term. We are focused on the long term defense cooperation and relationship with Ukraine and ensuring that they have what they need to be able to deter future attacks from Russia and maintain their sovereignty long term. So thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it.