For many, 1947 was a pivotal point in history. But what if the real pivot point was 780,000 years before that? Why is the australite tectite at the center of a mystery? There is an asteroid bombardment. There is no crater. A large craft had been destroyed in space. Such conclusive evidence, NASA scientists went to great troubles to see if they could replicate this. Homo sapiens are genetically engineered. Diverged 780,000 years ago. How do we come about? What is a human? What is our origin? Why are we here? That's a clip from a little skeptical movie project episode kind of experiment that I've put together with Bruce Frenton who you'll hear from today. And Sean Fahey who was the guy who really did all the work behind it. Although Bruce and Danny did a lot of the work too. Anyways, I am so excited about Bruce's work and I always have been. In the last interview we did, I thought was just terrific. And then I ran into the Snake Brothers, Russ and Kyle Allen of Brothers of the Serpent podcast. And I kind of got them interested in it. And they're interested in doing a series of interviews on this topic. So as kind of a way of launching that little project, I invited everybody here on Skeptico. And here's what we came up with. Welcome to Skeptico where we explore controversial science and spirituality with leading researchers, thinkers, and their critics. I'm your host Alex Cares. And today we welcome back Bruce Fenton to Skeptico. Bruce is the author of Exogenesis, Hybrid Humans, a Scientific History of Extraterrestrial Genetic Manipulation. And also the Forgotten Exodus, the Into Africa Theory of Human Evolution with a forward by Graham Hancock, which is quite impressive. And because I thought Bruce's work was so fantastic, innovative, and important, as you know, if you listen to that first interview that I did with him, he's also featured in this upcoming, not even upcoming, it's out. That's what we're going to talk about today. This extended video slash movie we did called 780,000, Our Alien Origin Story, which is available right now. You can go watch it on YouTube for free. It's soon going to be on Amazon as well. If we can ever get it up on that platform, which is, I don't know, they're saying they need more time. So give them all the time they need. And we're also joined today by Russ and Kyle Allen, the creators and hosts of Brothers of the Serpent podcast. Just a very, very cool show. You know, I was on their show recently, and I really, really enjoyed the way these guys dig into this. We have kind of a similar perspective on it, although they are much more well versed in kind of these ancient mysteries kind of things. So I thought it'd be great to have them on along with Bruce and kind of do like a little launch party for this video, 780,000, and for Bruce's excellent book. You know, an opportunity to get on and talk about some stuff. And we were all just having a chat, you know, before they, before we hit tape rolling and it was super, there's so many interesting things to get to. So Bruce, first of all, to you, welcome back. Thanks for joining me. We've talked so many times during the making of this film, and it's been just great working with you. So thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Thanks for working with us on the film production. You're really cool. Yeah, it was really cool. It was really great.  And I think people could, we'll get that from reading the book and they'll maybe know. And I think it also maybe comes in in the interview you did and that we referenced to it, but she's awesome. And it was just so cool getting to know her as well. So we'll talk to her to do some sort of video chat with you or something or, you know, so that she can give you her overview another time as well. That's good. I like sneak that in. And that's how we're going to do it. Hey, and then Russ and Kyle, I want you guys to, hey, I don't know if you can see this, but I am wearing my, hey, look at that. My snake t-shirt in honor of you guys and the hat, just to trigger anyone who could possibly be triggered by the American flag. I didn't have any agenda. I just put a flag in my hat, but I know that's still going to trigger people. So you guys, so cool having you here. Thanks for coming on. Yeah. Thanks so much for having us looking forward to this interview. Yeah, it was a blast having you on our show, Alex. And we're really, we're really glad to be here on Skeptico with Bruce. So Bruce, do you want to take it kind of from, take it from the top, if you will, on, you know, these two books, what they're about in for someone who really doesn't know is just kind of dropping into this conversation, kind of a quick overview of what's going on with these two books that you wrote. Exigenesis and this into Africa book, which I know you wrote a few years ago, but I think it's like such a great, important piece of this puzzle as well. And we're going to play some clips from 780,000 that will highlight that, but just kind of the overview for the uninitiated. Sure. Just bear in mind that my quick overview sometimes is about 60 hours long on anything. All right, true, true. But no, I'll try and condense it down. But yeah, the two books do sort of connect, you know, the, the into Africa book really was part of a project that I got involved with where I went to a site out in the jungles in Ecuador. The site was rather mysterious. It wasn't clear who built it. There were indications based on nearby archaeology that it could relate to the Lagoa Santa people. Now they are known from sites down in Brazil, notably the Lagoa Santa site, but also a number of other sites across Brazil and even in other areas as well.  There, there've been finds across parts of more central Ecuador, including the Banyosta, Agua Santa, which is near, the town nearest to this site that have, you know, cave sites where they have found remains that appear to be Lagoa Santa. So we know that for some reason these people are trekked up through the jungles of Brazil, you know, up through the Amazon and into Ecuador. And so there's, I believe there's a whole lost story there, you know, civilization throughout the jungles. I mean, obviously there's all sorts of legends about lost cities in the Amazon jungle. We know they're not just stories because some of these are getting found as well as mound sites and all sorts of other constructions. In fact, we know that the Amazon jungle is essentially seems to be a sort of a market garden that went wild. There's a lot of, there's a lot of trees and plants and it suggests that it was, in some respects, deliberately planted in parts and then it went kind of wild. Now this, this indicator of the Lagoa Santa led me into the work of, into Africa work because it turns out these are kind of Australoid people or, you know, they appear to be of morphology of Australian aboriginals or Papuans. Now, what are these people doing down in South America 20,000, 30,000 years ago? See that, that is an implicit argument against the prevailing models of how America was first inhabited. So when we sort of dig deeper into that, you know, you have to kind of explain, well, how are these people in the Americas so early, if we have an out of Africa story with, you know, 55,000 years ago, modern humans first emerging from Eastern Africa, populating Eurasia, eventually reaching Australia and then the Americas. And then conversely, if it turns out that you've got modern humans in the Americas 40,000 years ago and that they're aboriginal type people, that really doesn't fit. Okay, hold on, let me interject with a clip from the movie. There's very obviously a cultural shift underway which fits diffusion rather than sudden emergence. This is precisely what the genetic data is telling us, that a new paper has just come out, in fact, about a week ago, and they have found that the y-chromocernal lineages of all Eurasian people points to a migration out of Southeast Asia and East Asia 55,000 years ago. Where's Africa in that story, right? This is hugely problematic. A 2018 paper looking at the MT DNA, the mitochondrial lineages, they found that the oldest variants of haplogroups M and N, which are considered foundational to all modern Eurasian people, those turn out to be aboriginal Australians, right? Nowhere near the Middle East, nowhere near where they think that these new haplogroups are appearing, you know, East Africa and the Middle East. So you've now got the female and male lineages seeming to arise somewhere in Oceania or East Asia, right? Okay, I'll pause it there. Eric, we could go on and on.  Okay, I'll prove it to you. Here it goes, do you want to elaborate on that either when you guys, Russ or Kyle? Well, unfortunately, I'm not as familiar with his out-of-Africa book. The one that I've studied the most is the exogenesis one. So some of this information is newer to me, but what I was specifically speaking about was, you know, in your book you sort of intertwine the intuitive information with, and then you go digging for the data. Now, I found that a fascinating way to do the research, but it's harder for me to, like, you know, you say, okay, so we have these ideas or this person had this dream or this other thing, and then you go looking for information and you find it in the scientific data. That was the part that I found fascinating. So that's basically what I was meaning when I was saying that I had a harder problem with the intuitive part. But then once you got into the science, I'm like, okay, there we go. Fair enough. Kyle, do you have any thoughts on the out-of-Africa part of that? Because, you know, in this larger story that we're going to tell in this interview and in this film, the exogenesis is the story of our human origins are traceable by science that Bruce has discovered to 780,000 years ago. And to me, that kind of shifts our focus. It's not just like a date. It, like, totally changes the paradigm that we would be contemplating. Even some of the crises that we're going through now, it kind of forces you to shift your focus and say, wow, how does this really fit in? And I think it also, that's why I wanted to start with the out-of-Africa thing, is we get hung up on Africa and the migration into, out-of-Africa. What, 70,000 years ago or whatever? Bruce is talking about 780,000 years if we ever let him get to that story. But first, Kyle, do you have any thoughts or have you ever looked into the Africa, out-of-Africa, into Africa? Because Bruce's thing is like, look, if you really are honest about looking at the data, yeah, there's a movement out of Africa, but it's after a movement into Africa. So these people were escaping from an ecological disaster and they moved into Africa.  That's the event that, and then he goes and looks, finds all this archaeological data that predates that. And he goes, well, then obviously, that was just the second leg of the journey. So I don't know, Kyle, have you looked into that at all, or do you have any thoughts? Yeah, just a little bit. I think generally there are some obvious problems with it, just based on some of the stories that I've followed. But the genetic trail is something that's really hard for me to wrap my brain around, how they follow this genetic trail. But yeah, there's been some pretty recent stories where they're finding stuff in Europe and saying, wait, how is this possible? Our story about the out-of-Africa, should have, like these people or this thing that we're finding should be here at this time. So yeah, I think there's definitely some legitimate questions. And I'm coming into this thing cold as far as your work, Bruce, but I'm looking forward to reading your books. So yeah, very interested to hear. And also we have followed pretty closely a lot of the quote, unquote, anomalous finds in the Americas of much more ancient peoples. Kyle and I, I think I would say that we focused our study on younger, driest period and afterwards in terms of the human origin story, because that's, you know, we're looking at this more recent period. So when you take it all the way back to 780,000 years, I'm like, okay. Yes. Yeah, this is way more interesting. And there are finds in the Americas that are too old. The Clovis first model has been destroyed, basically. I mean, there are some people that are still clinging to it. But yeah, there are plenty of finds here that I think ruin that story for them. Absolutely. Yeah. So Bruce, let's just wrap up this into Africa, out of Africa. What are we living off here that people should come to understand through your work that's important to the bigger story? One thing I suppose is it kind of reminds us that, you know, if we're talking about where does this story start? Again, you have to decide, you know, what is a human and what is important to the human story, all these kinds of concepts. Because if you say, where does our lineage start? Well, it starts with a single celled organism 4.5 billion years ago in the ocean somewhere. So I mean, where do we trace to, where do we start in the human story? So if you are taking it just from the genus Homo, then that appears to emerge first in Africa. But then if you trace it back to, you know, earlier hominins, some of those appear to be in the Mediterranean region now. They're finding fossils to suggest perhaps the earliest hominins might have been there. And if you go back to when was the first kind of primates that they're tracing these back down to East Asia and the jungles there. So there is a degree of where do you want to start the story? Right. Now, if we're dealing with Homo sapiens, then that's where I say that, you know, I argue that their story begins 780,000 years ago. So again, so someone can sort, you know, you can kind of say, well, where are you starting this? And that's important to where we are looking geographically and what kind of human we're looking at. Right. So it does shift. And I think the, the out of Africa and the, the greater evolutionary story kind of informs us of that timeline, that narrative, but then we have to choose from it what is important. And obviously the, the newer book really is a focus more on Homo sapiens and our story. Yeah. So that's where we should go. I don't want to hold back or like bury the lead here. Tell us about the shift to 780,000 years ago and why you think that needs to be taken seriously, how you originally kind of came to even entertain the idea. And then specifically, and that's what we really tried to capture in our previous interview on skeptico and in this new release of 780,000 is how you proved it. Cause you went about proving it as in NASA documents, archaeological finds, you know, published work, you proved it in that way. So tell us that the big picture there. Yeah. I mean, well, one of the interesting things that happened and it's again, it's still quite recent. You know, it's funny how sometimes synchronous events flow because until very recent in the last few years, it was understood that Homo sapiens emerged around about 400,000 years ago, something like that, that we split off from Nanda Falls and, you know, but then they found the oldest DNA ever from any humans, which came from a sign Spain called Simigalus wesos, the pit of bones.  And it turned out that that was from an early Nanda full ancestor. And really it was so far along the, the evolutionary roots becoming Nanda falls, we don't understand that it pushed back the split between Nanda falls, us and Denisovans all the way back to at least 550 to 750,000 years ago. So it was like a massive rewrite. Since then there's been other studies. There's a comparative study of different craniums and drawers, teeth that pushed it to around 900,000 DNA sampling of Denisovans suggesting 800,000. I mean, some of these days, they're never absolutely precise. They give you a range. But in the middle of these ranges, you keep coming to around this 800,000. And now that ties in nicely with cranium finds that we already had in the record we showed around 800,000 years ago. Hold on because we are kind of burying the lead on people. And I get that you can't tell the story and that we're trying to squeeze it down. But you started with 780,000 because you were, you were told, you were told that this information was passed to you again. And as Russ said, in a way that we're not comfortable with, you know, it's into the metaphysical and the psychic and the stuff like this. And it gets into connection with. El Trianga objects that somehow have an ability to communicate all this kind of crazy stuff. So I think you immediately go to the science stuff because we love that we all love that we want to hear that you can back it up. But we are kind of burying the lead because you started with this information whispered in your ear, if you will. That said, it all started 780,000 years ago. Now you, Bruce, need to go prove that. And you did. Yeah, that's the interesting. Yes. We could say it's down the other way. So I'm giving you the what's happened since we got that day. The funding and science has come in to match it. You're right that we already had a date that we were looking at. And at the time when that information, the idea that there was events 780,000 years ago coming to us via an interaction between an individual in Australia named Valerie Barrow and an artifact, which is a considered to be a highly sacred artifact of the R&T people who language group that centers around Central Australia, Urugu, some of the regions around there, that they have these artifacts, which their own law says are embodiments of beings from the first time, the creation time, the Outringer time, that these are literally living entities in a form that will persist against time and where. And that they took on those forms in that creation. And that these carry information down through the ages. And they are usually, you know, they're kept in caves. They kept away from people. They can only be handled by the elders. They were called clever fellows. We basically what we think of as shamans who are the only people can interact with these because they're so highly sacred, but possibly for other reasons. It may even be dangerous. I mean, there's an indication that a lot of people be scared of these. They wouldn't really want to go near them. Now, I suggested this could be something like a Bracewell probe, which is an extraterrestrial technology, which would be left on a planet. Hypothesized kind of sci-fi idea that, Hey, if you're going to explore space, what you might do is just shoot these probes out there, have them land and then come to life and wake up and you know, echo, tell me what time it is kind of thing. And that this is kind of like that because it starts spewing out all this information about what's going to happen in the world and what you need to do. And then it starts working your way into your dreams and into Danny, your wife's dreams and other interactions. And you have this in the in 780, you know, you tell about where you're almost brought to tears by the fact that what you're finding is matching what you've had these visions of for so long. So it's again, this blending of the science with this extra extended consciousness kind of input that you're getting, which really is so fascinating. Yeah, that was years before in 2002, around 2002 that I've had an experience doing a sort of shamanic journey, altered state journey in which I'd experienced myself as being an entity, a tall human identity on a craft coming towards the earth, knowing that there'd been some kind of an event in which a lot of other fellow beings had been destroyed, feeling that as though being there, not like, you know, a conventional memory, experiencing it that you're there, it's you, this is happening now, that you're aware of what's just happened and all of that. And that lasted probably for a couple of minutes just now I had no context for it. You know, it's 2002. And then all these years later, sort of in 2013, I first became aware of this, this story, you know, from Valerie Barrow and her book, you know, through research in Australia, just to clarify that her work was published in 2003 around the time that I was having that experience, funnily enough. So it may even been the same sort of time which was writing the book, which is kind of intriguing. And that that meshed up with the information in her book that there was these beings in craft coming down from this exploded mothership. A lot of beings had died, even the clothes I was wearing meshed up to the descriptions in her book. So it was bizarre.  You know, is there an alien technology packing into people's brains? You know, is there a spiritual entity that telepathically telling people this? You can go down lots of wormholes, but the problem is it was a very extraordinary experience, which then linked to information I wouldn't be privileged to for another decade or so. And it turns out that beyond that, that there's actual evidence that supports both of these accounts. So it's extraordinary flow of information events. I've written about questions I want to ask about exogenesis, but they are kind of, I mean, like unless somebody's read the book, they will have no idea what we're talking about. So maybe, maybe we won't do that on this show, or maybe I can try to get into some of it based on stuff you say, but I think, I don't know, Alex, how do you want to handle it? Do we assume that people who are listening to this are familiar with the work? I apologize if it's somewhat disjointed or if it moves us too far in the story, but I'll play a clip from the 780,000 movie and then we'll hear from Bruce next. Sound okay, guys? Cool.  But my interest was in these major events, because I felt there was the potential to be signatures in the geological records and in, you know, academic papers that I could go away and look for evidence of this. Suddenly, I had an understanding of a whole series of synchronous events in my life, going back years. Now, going all the way back to the events in around 2002 when I'd had this shamanic journey experience where I'd seen, you know, an alien craft basically coming in towards the Earth. Now, Bruce, maybe you could give folks a high-level recap of what you thought you might be able to prove. So, I mean, yeah, from the event that we just discussed already with what I had happened to me, see that you could say influenced me to take more seriously Valerie's accounts in terms of what was in her book, which is that there is a craft that comes here, a crystalline craft, which is destroyed in orbit, vast, you know, not to like a little tiny flying saucer, this is said to have had 50,000 beings on board, very large craft, with smaller craft on board, is destroyed in orbit. There is just a, well, there's a few that survive, they come down, but they are involved in genetically modifying existing hominins on this planet to sort of upgrade them, if you like. And at five years later that there is an event involving a multi-directional asteroid impact of this planet that is engineered by extraterrestrials. Now, these were free, obviously radical and enormous, kind of, impactful events in our history if they were real. So, they stood out to me as being potentially provable in ways that most things aren't, you know, so we said that there was a being and he did this, he did that. Okay, you're not going to find the bones, you know, of that, you know, if there's something on a big scale, something exploding in orbit, meteorites impacting, you know, modification of the genome, those three things stood out to me as being potentially evidential. So, one of the things we talk about a lot in the film is this of tech-tight thing. And maybe you want to tell people a little bit about high level and then get into the details of what is tech-tight and why it was a real mystery. It was a mystery in science in general before you even decided to look into this and then what is the mystery surrounding them? Why is it so important to this story? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, to be honest, in some respects, the Australite mystery, you know, is deserving for all analysis on its own, irrespective of any stories about, you know, visitations and genetic engineering or any of that. Because you have there a event which has been known to science for a hundred years, not explained away, despite all kinds of teams of, you know, geologists, physicists, master engineers, all sorts of people have thrown their minds at this because we have something that's happened seven to eight thousand years ago, it's been well dated. We have this creation of this material, this Australite tech-tight spread all across this vast region from Antarctica up to southern China. You know, this absolutely huge enormous debris field, right, which does not mesh with any known impact events. I mean, we have impacts of metrites and asteroids and stuff throughout history. We don't see this kind of debris field. We also have this mysterious material which not only is it quite clearly this glass-like tech-tight, but in some instances you have it in this button forms where it definitely has traveled through the upper atmosphere and entered into our atmosphere and had secondary melting on its way down. They actually look kind of like little flying saucers. They do, ironically, yeah. And it's not even so ironic when you break it down, which you do just beautifully. So again, you know, if you think of a craft design, like a nose cone of a rocket, it's dealing with the aerodynamic forces entering our atmosphere. So that's why we see this. And so again, if you're looking at spaceships, whether human or extraterrestrial, there's probably some sense to the fact you see these kind of shapes. Because again, if you're entering atmospheres in a conventional sense, that you would have aerodynamic shaping. Yeah, and there's another interesting thing about them is that they had a two-stage shaping process that you sort of detail in the book that they appear to have started out as spheres, and a crystalline sphere can't form on the ground in the sense that it won't be a sphere. You know, liquid spheres form in space in a zero GA environment. And then it has a secondary shaping process which is the reentry part where the sphere is sort of reshaped into this aerodynamic shape. And even you were saying in the book that NASA studied some of these shapes to make their reentry vehicles, because they were they were set up for the reentry affecting the atmosphere. Yeah, from my understanding, they sort of realized these teams were involved in designing these vehicles. They obviously noticed the similarity that this kind of looks like it has that look of having entered the atmosphere. So they were very intrigued and very interested. And that's how NASA sort of got involved with it. And there have been various NASA associated studies of australite tech types by different people. They basically concluded that it has to have come from a source body that was in orbit that had superheated in some way, you know, reduced to a molten liquid glass and that that then calls into these spheres as you said, and that then as these enter and they have to enter quite slowly at a fairly gentle angle that they can't, you know, they don't come in fast and hot like we have with meteorites and asteroids that these have to come in at a fairly gentle angle. And that's why we have the time for secondary melting and the running of a liquid glass to the back forming these shapes. And everything that comes in very, very fast and at a steep angle. What happens instead is you have the evaporation of the surface layers and extraordinary heat from the friction and that just evaporates off. You don't really get much liquid. That liquidation process can't really happen unless you have a gentle slow entry. That ties into what you're just mentioning there, Bruce, and I don't want to gloss over it because there's like a million points here. We can't possibly cover them all today folks, but this idea of an orbiting object, which is really strange because, again, I didn't know this stuff. I learned it from you, but you can't have an orbiting object that doesn't fit the profile of a spacecraft. I mean, nothing else, I'm saying that backwards, but nothing else fits that profile of an orbiting object quite as nicely as this large crystalline object that you're talking about. Yeah, essentially, you have to get into extraordinary mathematical odds for the Earth to capture any significantly large body. It's so unlikely that in many mainstream sources I looked at, they just discount it. Others say that it's just within the realms of possibility if something came in at exactly the right angle, the right size. There's so many considerations. Essentially, we don't expect this to happen. That we have very small objects, car sized asteroids and things like that, which do get captured. And respectively, large planets like Jupiter and Saturn, they sometimes capture larger asteroids and comets, temporarily usually. But Earth, it's not expected to happen. So it was quite extraordinary to find that, again, which points to that we have something very unusual just in the fact that a large body is now orbiting the planet. And then it turns out that the content, the silica is too high at around 75-80%. We find that asteroids are limited to about 60%. We don't know of any natural bodies out there that are over 60% silica. So when you start putting these kind of factors together, you have this very unlikely object which is now in orbit. You know, precisely the ten times we have a line of extraordinary events, you know, a magnetic pole reversal, the emergence of homo sapiens, an asteroid bombardment, what is going on? Once you start factoring that in.  So like, I mean, science is looking at millions of years and saying, okay, we've seen these different things fall from the sky and they're going, wow, but this is the only time we can see something exactly like this that has ever happened in this particular place only once and it happened at exactly this time that we were looking for. I mean, I don't think, well, how did that strike you guys in terms of being extraordinary or being, well, show me more. No, this part about the tectites, the fact that you know, the objects seem to be moving too slowly like he was saying to be a normal cometary or asteroid old body impact. Those move really quickly. When they come into the atmosphere, number one, they don't start out molten. That's one point. Number two, they come in so fast that a lot of times, depending on the angle of impact, they're only in the atmosphere for a couple of seconds before they make landfall. What about the fact making landfall? What about the fact that there's no crater? Yeah, there's no... As Bruce points out, you know, later is that anything, when you start talking about things this size and then you go over to Laos where we start seeing these bigger objects and they're huge, you know, they're 20 kilograms, there's no crater. And Bruce, didn't you say that we would estimate the crater to be like dinosaur extinction size thing? It was either 40 kilometers or 40 miles across, you know, so like a vast vast sized, you know, and because it's supposed to be young, it's 780,000 years, obviously we can find impact sites from millions and millions of years ago. So this was really problematic. It's been, you know, a head scratcher for the geologists for it just fits perfectly with your theory, right? If it's a spacecraft that was blown up in space, there's no crater, it's all this little debris that's thrown around, versus if it's a big rock up there, it comes down and it slams into the earth. But I'm sorry guys, I kind of cut it off a little bit short. What else did you think about that and or the crater? Well, I really think the idea is awesome but my brain immediately goes into trying to figure out how it could not be aliens, right? That's right, you should. You know, it's just what happens and I'm imagining well, there could have been a scenario where there was an impact which is extremely unlikely between two commentary or, you know, meteorite or meteor objects near the atmosphere at their closest approach to earth to slow them down and also melt them to create your initial molten spheres that then fell slowly into the atmosphere. That doesn't necessarily explain the high silica content but it could explain a very unlikely scenario of slow entry of pre molten and then solidified spheres that were out in space and then fell down and remelted upon entry. Yeah, and there would be no crater. Again with the idea about capturing a body in space, you know, there's always these like infinitesimally small chances of things happening, right? But what we can look at there is that nobody has got none of the scientists who spent the hundred years on this propose that as a possible solution. So, one would assume that that's because of when you put all the evidence together, that would remain problematic. You know, again, apart from the odds of these two objects happening to here. We think about the size of space and we think about how unlikely would be the two relatively small objects in space to hit and just happen to hit in the upper, you know, the upper ends of our planet and then does the distribution pattern fit with that? You know, and as you said, if it's two different bodies we'd almost expect to have some of the material that would be different would have some of the different components. If you have some of the original body A body B, that body A should be a different composition to body B. What you find with Osprec tectite is it's very homogenous that throughout the entire mass of these materials being found is almost identical in composition throughout. That's problematic for any of the scenarios, but also for the impact because what you expect in a really fast kind of singular explosion event, that you should pick the impact, that you should have some of the material that is only partly melted or is of different compositions, like if you're impacting some granite and sandstone that some parts will have more granite, some parts will have more sandstone, some parts are partly melted, some aren't. So again, if you have two objects here you would expect to be able to detect the presence of two original source bodies that some parts remaining from part A and part B. Again, because of the homogeneity of the material that really points to being just an object superheated, not encountering material from other objects whether the earth, the moon or another body. So that's where it becomes problematic. And also in fact this homogeneity especially the lack of bubbles, it turns out that this whole thing called Moore's Law or something like, Moses' Law or something like that. Basically that if you create a glass and you want to remove all the bubbles, like when we're producing glass that you have to have a kind of sustained event, that you heat the glass for a while and that refines it down to this homogenous material with very few bubbles. And it's pointed out that in fact with with this glass material that we have that this is problematic because in an impact you have a singular moment of extreme energy, extreme heat extreme pressure and that's it. That's not how we form homogenous glasses, they're energized over time. And now we're told in this original material this ship is being hit with a sustained energy beam that is superheating it and is essentially melting it and blows it apart and it turns into this homogenous glass. So that's again, this is a funny factor that's been pointed out by some of the sides is it shouldn't be homogenous like this if it's a singular just, you know, impact explosion, we shouldn't see this we should see a lot of bubbles and see a lot of heart melt and things like that. So again, there's a lot of science that suggests we have something extraordinary happening. Yeah, or it could have been heated from within the spaceship from whatever energy drive it had. Well, yeah, it explodes there's a nuclear explosion at the end.  No, no, no, not necessarily that. No, I mean, like I say, if there's a way to explain it in another way, but I say this is problematic because they really what can be a sustained energy event that, you know, other than this, because if impacts don't explain it, what are we left with, you know, solar flare or something, you have to find something a mechanism that could continually heat this body to make this homogenous, nearly bubble free glass. Yeah, and, you know, the other idea, the, you know, the standard model idea for tectites is that their post explosion that they're actually supposed to be a mixture of the impactor and ejecta. Exactly. And this part melt. Right. And so like you're saying, this material doesn't fit that profile, because like you said, it would be a mixture of all this different stuff and it's actually too homogenous for that. So it is interesting. And not just the australite tectite, you know, they're for the stream field and these are problematic. I don't go into them in the book, but keep in mind that the whole history of the planet, there's only like four of these stream fields. That's right. Now what the hell's going on there? Because if these are just from standard impacts, then why why are there not, you know, hundreds and hundreds of these sites with these, so I mean, again, you could probably dig dive into the back storage some of these others. I haven't, but I do suspect that they're all in some way extraordinary. But the reason why we can focus on this one in particular is because it's unique in that we have these tectite buttons that are quite clearly come down from space. So then it's not the same as the other stream fields. Hey, so Bruce, that is like, I mean, we could talk we just talked so long and that's why it's really cool if you guys do have Bruce on for a series of interviews, I think that'd be fantastic because that's really what this topic deserves, especially for folks like all of us who are interested in the science. And again, the key part of this story is it has this incredible extended consciousness aspect to it. And then what we're trying to do in our humble little minds here is tie it back to this science and I can't let go of this. There's four fields, four times when we've seen this kind of tectite event and you're talking about just one of them. What is the range of those different ones? And you've already explained why this one is unique. But I guess I want to drive home this point that of all the events we've ever traced on the the history of the geological history of our planet, you know, all the different secretors, this is unique. Yeah, I mean, some of them go but I mean, I think with the mold of it goes back it's certainly in the tens of millions, if not longer. There's another strewn field, I think an African strewn field which is around a million years old and some have suggested that perhaps it's closer to the dating on the Australite than that. Maybe it's within the same frame, but they think it's around about a million years old. So that's the second, you know, second youngest and then you've got mold of it and you've got a U.S. site as well, which I forgot where it's actually in Georgia. In Georgia, yeah. The piece of it that's exposed that we know about is in Georgia, yeah. And so that one I think is again going back quite early. Yeah, that one's really old, I think. So it's only these two that are fairly recent, the African and the Asian. So again, you know, you get the little echo machine in the Aboriginal Australian people have their ancient echo and it comes out and says, hey look guys, it's 780, look for it and boom you find it right to the date. You don't find it 10 million years ago, 5 million years ago you find it boom and that is unbelievably needle in a haystack thing and it's just easy to kind of lose the big picture here. Well yeah, that and of course, and then we very briefly mentioned, you know, there's a claim that there is a multi-directional asteroid bombardment of the planet five years later. So now in geological terms you can't pinpoint five years difference. So you would be looking for an event approximately in the same 10,000, 20,000 years, right, because we're not quite at the pinpoint accuracy on these. Right. But you know, it turned out that in 2016, you know, a team of German geologists had stumbled on evidence of a multi-directional asteroid bombardment and keep in mind this book, you know, the source material is published, you know, so it's in the public record from 2003. This em, most recent impact is discovered in 2016. Now, you can't then say, well, you know, this person's heard about it, you know, they've woven it into a sci-fi story. You just can't do that. And it turns out that when, when does this event happen? Approximately the same time as the Australites. So they give it a little bit of leeway cycles about three different or four different impact sites they found and they, they're close enough in their geological dating that they believe they happened at the same time. Now, you've got impacts down to Tasmania, impacts in Central America and impacts a couple of the sites and they are sure that these basically are, you know, interrelated. Yeah.  Some people survive. They end up on the ground. They start trying to live there. They, I guess they sent out a distress call, you know, and then five years later people show up and they're, and they start bombarding the planet and there are survivors on the planet. I'm like, wait a minute. Why would they do that? You know, I mean, I know this is probably not something that can be answered, but this part of the story bothered me. I don't, I wondered why when they asked for rescue that the people show up and then start slamming the planet with asteroids. That you can't... They don't want rescue. That's sort of clarified in the book. They don't want to be rescued. They are offered to be rescued. That's right. This is more like an enforcement of the original agreement for another group to leave the planet. But there is a communication between them. So although it's never completely explained, we assume that there is some level of defense of locations where these other survivors are. Yeah, because they are in communication, but there's no attempt to go into depth of this is how we put them in a particular area. It doesn't really explain it, but one has to infer that in this communication between them, where they say, we want to remain, that they would be protected from this bombardment. Yeah, they would have to tell them, okay, you need to go hide because we're about to start throwing asteroids in the planet you're on. We won't hit you here, but we're going to be throwing you off the planet to bits. That's right. Like I was saying, we've been studying the Younger Dryas period, specifically the impact hypothesis about the explosion of small material, even the stuff that just explodes in the air that doesn't always make it all the way down to the ground, causes extinction level events. You know, you don't have to have it. Yeah, it's cataclysmic for the whole planet. Absolutely. I mean, it's theorized that even with one of the objects that hit in Antarctica is believed to left an initial crater in the ice about 200 miles by 200 miles, 200 kilometers by 200 kilometers. I'll have to check. But you think that that was an object on the same scale as the one that eradicated the dinosaurs. That's not a small impact. And that's just one of them. There's several that are impacting and it was theorized that the only reason why that didn't cause the same level of extinction event is because it was in ice and because the world was in an ice age at that time. So there was a lot of sea ice and that absorbed a lot of the energy and so now these impacts were happening at a point when there wasn't so much ice, you know, like now that we would have had an event like the dinosaur extinction event. But it still was severe. I mean, they think that these multi-direction impacts caused firestorms, earthquakes, tsunamis.  It would have been there would have been mass extinction type events, you know, in some areas definitely. I would just like to make a comment about the story and its similarities to some translations and interpretations of the Sumerian text of the Anunnaki coming down in key genetically altering the hominids that lived on the planet to make the Adamu. And then you have another story that comes much later, which is the quote-unquote fallen, which are like Shem Yaza and the 200 fallen angels that come down, take the daughters of men to be their wives and then they don't want to leave, but it was against the compact with the gods or God. And so then there's like a battle ensues between them, where God destroys all of them. That's just really interesting to me, there are similarities for sure. You find them elsewhere as well, I know you say there's some elements of this in the Bible stories, again, which relates to the Sumerian stories anyway. Now this is problematic if you take it from a very mundane materialist, convalescent view, particularly if you take a view that there's not been contact events with other extraterrestrials over time. Otherwise it's quite easily explainable why we have similarities in these different stories, because if either of one of two or both of these other scenarios are true, then it's explainable. One being the very common claim that many people, particularly shamans, mediums, what not, can have psychical communication with non-human extraterrestrials that have this information and it keeps being perpetually renewed. Then immediately you can see how this stuff perpetuates through time and space. The second one being, of course, direct contact, which again, vast numbers of people, whole civilizations claim that they've been in contact, whether you know, native Americans, you know, Aboriginal people, all sorts of people said we've had ongoing contact, they tell us history, they tell us stuff. Some of them say we go and sit in the bush, meditate, get contact with the star people and they tell us stuff. So in either of those scenarios there's no problem.  How can the Samarians know this story from 780,000 years? How could they have any indication about modification of human beings? You know, why is that story so persistent? Why is it that Native Americans are talking about we have ancestry to the Pleiades? Where's this coming from? Even if it's even a real event, 780,000 years is too long for this to be oral history. It's too long. It's not believable that you can pass down an accurate story for 780,000 years, particularly when those first generation don't have the complex brain that we have. There's no reason to think that they were capable of really doing that, having that whole story and conveying it. So the only way you can have this is either someone is tapping into this information in some kind of psychical way or there's a direct contact. There's a landing, there's a refreshing of the story through that. That's basically what the Samarians were claiming is that the Anunnaki came down and told them all this. They had contact. Same as the Mayans have stories of direct contact. All sorts of cultures have stories. If you accept very many stories of direct contact or psychical interaction, either of those explain that straight away. Why are we hearing the similar story? The Samarian story seems almost like a slightly Chinese whispers version of what I'm providing in my book. It's not quite right. It's written down after the events. That's what I keep hearing in all this is the whisper to your neighbor, telephone game. I tell you what guys, we're running out of time and really, I think one of the purposes of this show was to kind of make this introduction because I'm really, really hopeful that you guys will do this series. You can already see. I think the audience can already see that the brothers, the snakes, they ain't going to roll over. Not the snakes roll over. I don't know how snakes do that. They're going to roll over on this. They're going to dig into it and they're going to try and pull it apart. And if anyone remembers the first interview that I did, that's how I framed it up because that's really what I did. I was like, no, I'm pulling this guy down. I'm pulling this man. He's going down. And I tried the best I could. So this is like a passing of the baton to people who are more capable. Pull it apart. Tell us where it's wrong. And Bruce has to run. So I want to leave people with something too. So go ahead, but I have a few things to say. Won't take me a minute, though. Okay, no. Do you want to do it before or after this clip? I have one thing. I would say if you're going to throw out if you're going to be a materialist and if you're going to throw out the possibility of contact, then you're not going to solve any mysteries about our origins. So that's my opinion. Go ahead and play the clip, Alex. I'll do this after that's over. Having validated that there was not only a large crystalline object in orbit, just as this information had stated, and having found that there was indeed a multi-directional asteroid bombardment as the information had stated. And I was in a position where I had to look at perhaps the most controversial and most important claim in this information, of course, that homo sapiens are tied to this story. These beings, this intelligence, you know, goes on to make a modification in the early hominins that are living on the planet at this time. Okay, so we might end that right there, and there's so much, obviously, that we could talk about in terms of the genetic modification. And it's incredible. I think people already get a sense for what Bruce goes into in his research, and I guarantee you he's done that with the genetic information, too. Not that you would believe it or have to believe it, but let me, as we wrap it up, let me toss it over to you, Russ, and tell me what you're thinking. Okay, so going through the book, I was really... Two things happened to me in the Gosper-Glyphs part. One, I was sort of confused by what was happening there, obviously.  Which was all interesting. The other thing that was really fascinating to me is that I've looked into this a lot. I don't know if you're familiar with Ben from Uncharted X. He's done a lot of work on this. He's gone there multiple times. He is Australian, but he lives in California, but he's been there. He has a whole video on it. There's a couple of guys, one of them is named Yusuf, they're Egyptians, and they have taken... Yeah, they've taken these glyphs, and they've got a whole series of videos on their YouTube channel, and they've published a paper about their translations. So what was interesting to me, the part that was strange was they're looking at the glyph types and saying, well, these look to be from this particular late period of Egypt, and the story they are translating from those glyphs. I got a couple of the lines here from their translations. Here's one of them. The ships capsized. They turned over and were destroyed into pieces. We prayed to our gods for help, but many were killed. God will keep the hidden burial from being reached and give the foreign land heritage. And eternal life to the deceased will be given power in this place. They are so close to the story that you're telling. It's very fascinating. So on the one hand, I'm like, okay, they're dating it to this very late period of Egypt, but on the other hand, this story sounds so close to the one that you're telling in your book, and so I definitely want to dig it into that more on our show. I'm so... So Bruce, we're going to give you the last word here. Tell people what's going on with the book, where they can find it. I know you're doing a lot of really terrific media appearance as well, and you're continuing to do this research. So tell us in a couple minutes kind of what continues to go on with this work. Yeah, I mean, if people would like to interact with me, I'm on Twitter quite a lot. You know, I try to be available to ask questions or queries. I think that they've read the book and they've got some feedback. You know, if they give me on basically exogenesis HH, we'll handle that. Yeah, I'm doing a lot of interviews, so people, if they sort of keep an eye on me, Facebook or on there, I'll share some of those links. I might do a kind of follow-up book. We'll see. So I am, you know, looking to see, you know, additional information to this. Of course, if they watch the free documentary on YouTube, the Greeks, they'll get a good overview, you know, from what we've done. But yeah, otherwise, the book is available at... In the US, it's available now. You know, bookstores, I understand you can order it. It's Amazon, Barnes & Noble. In Europe, the print version will be out either on the 26th of July due to, you know, coronavirus slowing down, shipping, and all that kind of stuff. But it's available, you know, audio, Kindle, or the other, alleyways, but just not print in Europe at the moment. Great. Well, I'll tell you what, we're going to wrap it up there. And I hope, you know, we kind of touched on some stuff like we said all along. It's a huge topic, so we can't get into it too much, but hopefully we've maybe made some people interested that didn't know about it before. And it's kind of fun to see you guys coming into it, you know, fresh and clean and some of your perspectives. So thanks, guys, and we'll stay on top of this. Bruce, Russ, Kyle, thank you all so much. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks again to Bruce and Russ and Kyle for joining me today on Skeptico. The question I guess I'd have to Tia from this interview has to do with the whole premise of the movie. Do you buy it? 780,000 years ago begins the human origin story. That's an unbelievably big claim. What would it take to nudge you closer to some acceptance of that? I'd love to hear your thoughts. Jump on over to the Skeptico forum or just drop me a note. I have some really interesting chats coming up. More on the evil stuff, of course, but not just on that. I hope you stay with me for all of that. I hope you're enjoying this and I hope you can find some value in it. Until next time, take care and bye for now.


Hi everyone today. I'm going to be presenting my paper on gas lock a security card ability trade-off resilient logic locking scheme This work was done while I was a PhD student at the University of Florida in collaboration with Dr. Sheldon shoe at North Beach University and professors Mark turn for endowment 40 at the University of Florida So here is an outline for today's talk in the first part I will provide an introduction to logic locking as well as the motivations behind it I will also go over some of the recently proposed logic locking techniques and some of the trade-offs that have been found in them in Terms of resistance to various tax I will then provide details on our proposed approach, which is gas gas lock or cascaded locking that specifically mitigates these Attack resiliency trade-offs. I will also explain the various security properties around castlock Especially around its resistance to various attacks as well as overheads I will then go into the details of our extension to castlock termed mirrored castlock or and casc that has been Especially formulated to mitigate removal attacks of the gate level. I will then end the talk with our conclusion As we all know the semiconductor supply chain today follows a horizontal business model Whereby different steps in the integrated circuit production process are scattered throughout the globe This is especially evident in today's age of system on chips Whereby IPs are sourced from multiple third parties sometimes hundreds of third parties and fabrication as well as tests are also outsourced While this supply chain has vastly increased in complexity over the past decade It has also resulted in significant cost reduction and has also allowed each party or design house to focus on their core strengths At the same time a global supply chain has also given rise to a number of issues related to integrated circuit security In terms of foundry and outsourced fabrication threats such as IPIC piracy and theft Hard retrogens or malicious backdoors over production These threats could exist There are also risks associated with various third parties involved in the design process such as outsourced physical design or DFT service providers This could give rise to issues such as IP piracy as well as hard retrogens Finally once the chip is fab packaged and shipped to OEMs or customers and is out in the field There's the risk of reverse engineering which then leads to issues such as cloning IP piracy design exploitation or tampering To counter these IP supply chain threats logic locking has been proposed as a potential solution The basic idea behind logic locking is quite simple It makes the functional behavior of a chipper design dependent on a secret key Now this is done by adding keying logic for example XOR gates as shown in the figure here into the design So the basic idea is that the design fails to produce the correct input output behavior unless the correct key is provided to the key gates This locking can also be done at various abstractions, but it's most commonly done at the gate or net disc level Due to the locked behavior of the design It is assumed that threats such as IPIC piracy over production and other attacks are thwarted since If you don't have the key that means the design is not functionally valid Since logic locking was first introduced numerous attacks have been proposed against it The first few attacks included DFT or ATPG based techniques to propagate the secret key to observable points of the circuit and thus infer the correct key Countermeasures for such an attack included careful placement of locking gates in the design to cause interference among key gates Removal attacks were also proposed in order to identify the key gates or locking logic in the design via structural metrics An attacker would subsequently in a removal attack remove the locking gates in order to invalidate the obfuscation or locking To mitigate such attacks logic resynthesis was proposed as a solution So what resynthesis does is it can merge the locking logic with the original design via logic optimization and thus prevent isolating of the locking gates in the design net list However, the most effective and notable attack proposed on logic locking so far has been boolean satisfiability or sat-based attacks In this approach an unlocked chip is assumed to be available from the open market or from a malicious insider Scan access to the chip is also assumed to be available The attacker then uses this unlocked chip as an oracle to infer the correct key The actual attack proceeds as follows Then attacker first formulates a mitre circuit from two wrong key guesses on two copies of the locked circuit From this formulation a distinguishing input pattern or dip is obtained Which is then checked against the unlocked circuit Or chip to obtain a golden input output response pair Now this golden input output response pair is then added as a constraint to the initial circuit formulation iteratively Until no more dips are obtained or distinguishing input patterns are obtained at this point What can be concluded is that if no more dips are found all wrong keys have been ruled out And usually this happens in only a few iterations And at the end of the attack the sat solver is able to return the correct key So you're iteratively ruling out pretty much the entire incorrect key space You know few iterations and the sat solver is giving you the correct key and just a few iterations To counter sat-based attacks several specific sat resistance counter measures have also been recently proposed The common idea behind most of these approaches is to insert a sat resistant logic block into the circuit Now what this block basically forces the sat attack tool to do Is to basically apply brute force. That is the sat attack tool is forced to apply All possible input patterns to rule out all all the possible incorrect keys and conversion of the correct key Now without this block what would happen is the attack would only take a few iterations to basically prune out the entire Incorrect key space and zoom into the correct key However, this block basically limits the discriminating ability of sat attack via these distinguishing input patterns it limits this capability as a result the attack is able to Converge on the correct key only after applying brute force That is it has to apply all 2 to the n input patterns to be able to converge on the correct key One of the more notable sat resistance locking techniques that has been proposed is anti-sat Which was introduced in chest 16 It is also similar to other sat resistant locking techniques In the sense that a sat resistant locking block is stitched into the original design net list However, the block functional behavior is quite unique It uses a pair of complementary logic blocks g and g bar that are ended together With g getting the key ki one and g bar getting the key ki two Note that ki one and ki two don't actually need to be equal to each other They just need to be set in such a manner that g and g bar outputs are always going to be equal to each other Now this means that the output y if you provide the correct key is always going to be zero And as a result the circuit functionality will never be corrupted via the xor gate that is shown here in red Sat resistance of the block is a function of the actual logic that is chosen chosen to be g and g bar When the output one count of g the boolean function g is very low sat attack resistance is maximized This is because it limits the ability of the attack to rule out incorrect keys Conversely, this also means that the output corruptibility of the circuit is quite low This means that for most input patterns the circuit behaves as though it wasn't locked at all So there is this inherent trade-off in anti-sat in terms of sat attack resistance as was corruptibility So if you're doing better on one end example resisting sat attacks, you're necessarily doing worse on corruptibility In chess 17, uh, we also proposed a new bypass attack against anti-sat and its variance The central idea of bypass attacks is to inject some additional logic Which we call the bypass circuitry into the locked circuit with anti-sat Now this bypass circuit, uh, basically mitigates the output corruptibility from the anti-sat block In other words, it identifies incorrect input output pairs from the circuit Which are expected to be quite limited if sat attack resistance needs to be guaranteed The attack then uses the bypass circuit to correct these input output pairs Which have been identified to be incorrect and thus the circuit is unlocked without ever needing the correct key With this attack What we also found that there is an inherent trade-off with regards to sat versus bypass attack resistance So if high sat attack resiliency is to be maintained This automatically implies that there is going to be a weak bypass attack resistance for the anti-sat block circuit Conversely, if we want to ensure strong bypass attack resistance This necessarily implies that there is a weak sat resistance with anti-sat So we found this trade-off that was sort of inevitable with anti-sat So in this work, we propose cast lock as an extension to anti-sat for specifically combating the various attack resistance trade-offs that we just talked about So in the paper, we proved that number one Breaking cast lock with sat attack requires at the minimum brute force through the entire input space We also proved that Cast lock is resistant to bypass attack and renders this attack infeasible But most importantly, we proved that number one and two The resistance to sat attacks as well as bypass attacks are simultaneously achievable Something which was not possible with anti-sat As an extension to cast lock we also propose m gas Which is a mirrored cast lock We specifically propose this to extend the resistance of cast locks to attacks based on removal against white box adversaries Before going into the details of cast lock and mirrored gas We would like to first talk about what are the high-level objectives for a logic locking scheme And how cast lock and subsequently m gas can meet them So the first requirement obviously is that the locking scheme should be lightweight So that it should result in low area power and delay overheads on the design That is intended to be locked The second one obviously it should be resilient to attacks More specifically, it should be resistant to sat attacks, which specifically means The sat attack algorithm should be forced to perform brute force through the entire input space to resolve the correct key Secondly, it should also be resistant to bypass attacks, which means For the bypass attack algorithm, it should be infeasible to find these bypass patterns to correct Finally, it should also be resistant to removal attacks Which means the locking logic that has been embedded into the circuit to perform the logic obfuscation logging Should not be readily identifiable and removed from the circuit so that the locking is basically nullified So these are the high-level objectives for a logic locking scheme that we would strive to meet So now we'll dive into the actual construction of our proposed cast lock approach So cast lock itself is quite similar to anti-sat, but it differs in two aspects First it adopts a cascaded structure in its complementary Boolean functions g and g bar As opposed to the tree structure followed in anti-sat Later, we will show how the structural difference in construction Guarantees some of the security properties of cast lock The second aspect is the Boolean functions itself g and g bar In cast lock, we vary the output one count of the g and g bar logic by varying the proportion of and and or gates What remains the same as anti-sat, however Is the input itself to the g and g bar blocks In both anti-sat and cast lock the xor of the inputs with the key is fed into g and g bar Note here that mixing Are using a mix of xors and xnors Can and should be used And the circuits should be re-synthesized afterwards So that an attacker won't be able to simply decode the correct key by observing The xor or xor gates in the cast lock block This was a requirement for anti-sat and it is also a requirement that holds true for cast lock So now we will elaborate on some of the security properties of cast lock We'll start with lemma one Which specifically has to do with proving the sat resistance of cast lock Under any arbitrary Construction of the boolean functions g-cast and g-bar cast Now by arbitrary, I mean in the cascade Of gates that are present in the boolean function g-cast and g-bar cast you can vary the and and or In the cascade to vary the output craft ability But regardless of which construction of and and or as you choose You will be able to prove that cast lock maintains Maximum sat resistance regardless of the construction To put it in another way that means if sat attack was conducted on cast lock The attack would be forced to go through all possible input patterns that is all to the End of them to be able to rule out all incorrect keys. So basically sat attacks would be reduced to brute force attacks So now we will lay out a proof sketch for the sat attack resistance security property from lemma one For this proof sketch Let's assume that we have the truth table for the boolean function g-cast and g-bar cast as shown here in the figure below In this figure or truth table We have the input patterns arranged in ascending order Now let's assume that the output one count Which is the number of input patterns that lead to g-cast is equal to one Let's assume that the number of patterns is arbitrary In other words, you can think of it as the height of this column highlighted in yellow Of this column of ones you can think of that as being any arbitrary height In such an order truth table, we will always have the smallest input input pattern Let's call this element for which g-cast is equal to one Uh Now let's assume that a wrong key composed of w k one j and w k two j Which jointly result in the wrong key w k j This wrong key goes into cast lock now recall that cast lock again has two portions g-cast and g-bar cast you can think of as w k one j going into g-cast and w k two j going into g-bar cast and jointly these two keys form w k j Now let's assume that the hamming distance of such a wrong key is as shown here That is w k two j the key going into g-bar cast is only different by a lsp or least significant bit from the correct key now for such a wrong key What effectively ends up happening is that g-bar cast the output from g-bar cast effectively gets pairwise flipped as shown in the truth table Uh and now at the input pattern element And only element we observe that both g-cast and g-bar cast is equal to one You can see that highlighted in yellow here What this basically means is for this input pattern and only this input pattern which with a wrong key w k j We get the output is equal to one Which means cast lock is effectively flipping the output bit of the logic circuit and cropping the input pattern for only element and no other input pattern So for any sad attack the only way to eliminate the wrong key w k j is to apply the distinguishing input pattern element and no other pattern Note that no other input pattern is able to rule out this wrong key. It is only element that can do this Now further since there are two to the n such wrong keys Of this of the type of w k j We can now say that there are actually two to the n unique patterns that are required for the sad attack to prune out all the wrong keys and guarantee a correct key Now this effectively proves that the sad attack algorithm will be reduced to brute force regardless of the output one count of g-cast or g-bar cast since a key such as Blue k j is always guaranteed to exist and these unique input patterns in the form of elvin Are always guaranteed to exist regardless of the output corruptibility that we've composed in g-cast or g-bar cast um, so Through the proof sketch, uh, we showed how for any arbitrary construction of g-cast and g-bar cast We are able to achieve best case-sat resistance. That is the set attack will require at least to the n iterations We also made an attempt at validating this experimentally by generating some sample anti-sat as well as cast lock Gate level net lists and using the sat attack platform to test them out What you can see in this Chart over here is that for cast lock Regardless of the output corruptibility or p-value You can see that the number of sad iterations is always maximum now by maximum I mean n is equal to 8 that means The number of inputs going to the cast lock block for this particular example was n equals to 8 So the number of iterations is always through the bar 8 Which is what we have over here Whereas for anti-sat which follows the tree structure we can see that Depending on the p-value the sat attack iterations the number of iterations required can vary And we see that the number of sad iterations is maximized only when p is extremely low or extremely high Now recall that Even though the sat attack iterations is high this also means high vulnerability to bypass attacks at these quarters So there is this inherent trade-off that you see in anti-sat, but for cast lock you can see that Sad attack iterations are always maximized regardless of the p-value The second security property of cast lock is output corruptibility Which can be varied by tuning the output one count of the boolean functions g-cast and g-bar cast And this can be done without any loss in sat attack resistance as we just showed previously The third property relates to bypass attack resistance to ensure this What cast lock does is it prevents the bypass attack algorithm from finding distinguishing input patterns or dips to bypass The ability of the bypass attack to find these dip patterns Distinguishing input patterns via the mitre circuit shown here on the right So this ability is drastically decreased as the p-value or output corruptibility of the cast lock circuit is increased as shown by the expression here So from a defender's perspective, he or she may choose to increase the corruptibility of the design to thwart bypass attacks While at the same time Guaranteeing best-case-sat attack resistance, which was not previously possible with anti-sat We can also look at the security properties of cast lock under two models One is under black box attack model and the other one is through a white box Black box attacks include attacks such as sat and bypass, which was the focus of cast lock In such an attack an attacker only analyzes the locked circuit via input output patterns or its functional behavior This might be the case of a reverse engineer trying to break the design in the field On the other hand white box attacks include capabilities of the attacker to perform Full structure structural analysis of the design Including netlist analysis now this gives them the opportunity to analyze the netlist and look for specific locking implementations to remove Of course, as we said earlier in the talk Resynthesis does provide a degree of protection against such attacks And so does additional x or x nor based locking on top of cast lock However, we found that such hybrid attack locking techniques do not really hold up against a particular modified version of the sat attacks that are known as absat Absat attacks are an extension to the baseline sat attacks with a subtle difference So in each iteration of the attack instead of adding one golden input output pattern The attack adds n such io patterns obtained from the distinguishing input pattern and the unlock chip This in essence increases the circuit formulation size But also helps to rule out a larger portion of the incorrect key space There is also a parameter set such that the attack instead of trying to converge on the 100 correct key Terminates with an approximately correct key that guarantees low output corruptibility and in some cases even the correct key Now coming back to cast lock when we insert additional x or x nor gates To prevent removal attacks What ends up happening is an expanded key space is created with some of it having low output corruptibility and some of it Having high output corruptibility as shown in this truth table Where the red marked outputs represent incorrect outputs Now when absat adds multiple golden input output patterns as constraints in every single iteration These help to rule out not only keys in the high corruptibility space But also in the low corruptibility space As a result it is more likely but of course not guaranteed that trying to prevent removal attack Actually hurts your ability to resist absat attacks So what we've established is in order to prevent removal attacks under a white box attack model It is clear that additional xor or x nor insertion is not enough So what we've come up with instead is an extension to cast lock called a mirrored cast lock or m gas The idea behind this simple extension Is that we have two mirrored copies of cast locks stitched into the original circuit netlist Instead of just one with one having a hard-coded secret key case secret So it's hard-coded and the other one having the actual secret key driven from the outside, which is k gas Now after inserting these two blocks the circuit is Is resynthesized in order to embed k secret into the netlist itself What now happens is if an attack attempts to remove the cast lock block with the key k gas driven from that side The cast lock block with the Secret key k secret which is merged into the original design after the synthesis that still remains in the netlist So correct functionality of the circuit is only guaranteed when the key k gas is equal Or set equal to the secret key k secret which is embedded inside the netlist Without doing this the circuit functionality remains corrupted As a result of the cast lock block with k secret which is embedded into the original design So m gas is able to protect cast lock against white box attacks such as removal Now unfortunately this countermeasure is not without its drawbacks Most notably what happens with m gas is if you try to increase the corruptibility of the locking It results inevitably in reduced sat attack resistance Now this happens mainly because the original circuit's output is corrupted on a certain number of input patterns This is because of the embedded cast lock block with k secret If the sat attack algorithm by any chance finds any of these patterns Such as the ones highlighted in blue in this root table shown It is able to arrive at the correct key in a single iteration Now of course this is probabilistic from the perspective of the sat attack But unfortunately the probability of success of the sat attack increases as you keep bringing the output corruptibility of the circuit out Now this brings us back to the trade-off between sat attack and corruptibility which we talked about at the beginning But in the context of white box attacks So this table briefly summarizes the security properties of m gas sat attack resistance Now of course depends on the output corruptibility of the circuit Which at turn is determined by the output one count b as far as the choice of the secret key case secret embedded into the original net list These two factors also determine the output corruptibility of the circuit, of course Apsat attack resistance is ensured as the attack has no guarantees of terminating with a correct or almost correct key Removal attack resistance is ensured due to the gas lock block Embedded into the original circuit with key secret as we explained previously and finally bypass attack resistance is inherited from gas lock So we also evaluated m gas against another recently proposed removal attack resistance logic blocking Technique that is known as sfll or strip functionality logic locking So we did a series of results on a few benchmarks and we found that in terms of overhead area delay and power We do better than sfll and offer the same severe security guarantees But of course at the end of the day both techniques still have the trade-off of corruptibility versus sat resistance Under a white box attack model So the designer has to carefully analyze the trade-off and I'll have to implement the locking accordingly So the table briefly summarizes the various logic locking techniques that have been proposed recently and their resistance to various attacks We can see that gas lock defends against sat and bypass attacks But is vulnerable to removal under a white box attack model To counter this we have proposed m gas which prevents removal attack But at the same time trade-off sat attack resistance with output corruptibility This is the same case with sfll However, it has been found vulnerable to a recently proposed fall attack that specifically attacks its mode of implementation We've seen that this fall attack does not apply to m gas In conclusion Gas lock provides a low overhead logic locking solution, which is simultaneously resistant to sat and bypass attacks Unlike anti-sats It can maintain non-trivial after corruptibility and remain secure under a black box attack model To prevent removal attacks we've proposed mirrored gas lock or m gas Which remains secure under a white box attack model But at the cost of sat attack resistance Which is traded off with of course output corruptibility


It is a religion of peace, submission, and commitment to one God and all He created. It is a way of being, a way of life. It is Islam, and fully one-fifth of people in the world follow this faith. They call themselves Muslims. Hello, I'm Chaplain Dean with the Chicago Police Department. This is the second in a series of videos to expand your knowledge and understanding of the many diverse communities within our city. Having even a basic knowledge of a person's customs and culture enables police officers to conduct their duties in a more efficient and respectful manner. Today we explore Islam. The Chicago area is home to more than 400,000 Muslims. Many are immigrants from around the world. But many more are second or third or even fourth generation Americans. For example, within the United States, the largest constituency of Muslims happen to be African American. After that, you have many Southeast Asians, Pakistanis and Indonesians, Malaysians.  And there are Muslims of every stripe, of every color and nationality. There are white Americans who are Muslim, African Americans who are Muslim. There are Russians and Chinese and Japanese who are Muslim. It's very important to keep in mind that Islam is not an ethnicity. It is simply a very basic religious creed. Muslims believe in one God who revealed Islam through all the prophets with the final prophet being Muhammad. Abraham is like the father of the three faiths, they call it. And the Christianity and the Judaism, it's all linked together. We're all of one God. That is the very definition of Islam, is to submit oneself to the message of God. We must stand for the protection of life. We stand for law against crime. We stand for morality and obedience to the law. As human beings who are living in the society, we're very committed to the upliftment of the society. And that we see as definitely a religious obligation. We bring a strong essence of moral values, family values, social values, notions of justice, notions about community service and social interaction, which are an inherent part of Islam, but which are also very important in the American fabric. A Muslim place of worship is called a mosque. The Imam is the person who leads the prayers. The Islamic holy book is called the Quran. And God is often referred to as Allah.  In fact, many of the Christian population in the Middle Eastern areas, they refer to their God as Allah, because it's just an Arabic term for God. Muslims practice the five pillars of Islam. These are witness, affirming the absolute unity of God and accepting the prophecy of Muhammad. Worship, offering ritual prayers five times a day to God while facing in the direction of the Kaaba in Mecca. Charity, obligatory donation annually of at least 2.5% of accumulated wealth. Fasting, complete abstinence from food, drink and conjugal relations from dawn until dusk by able-bodied adults during Ramadan. Pilgrimage, visiting the Kaaba and other sites in Mecca at least once in a lifetime. Muslims will conduct their daily prayers privately if possible, or publicly if necessary. When a Muslim prays, he prostrates, or she prostrates him or herself to the ground and puts their head to the ground. It's not a prayer unless you have seen this before. I've been around Muslims that you're accustomed to seeing. If law enforcement officials, police officers have to contact some Muslims, it would be best to avoid those times when people are focusing on prayer, especially in public places. Friday is the holiest day in Islam. Between 12 noon and 2, Muslims gather at Masj for congregational prayers. Very, very sensitive to Friday prayers. And the mosque is very, very sensitive. If you have to go in the mosque for a criminal, I beg you to have the same respect you would have for Catholic Church or for Protestant Church. We don't wear our shoes. We don't wear our shoes onto the actual carpets and the prayer rugs. So that would be considered extremely inappropriate and offensive for, for example, police officers going in to investigate something and have you to walk on the rugs with their, with their shoes. Of course, also there are copies of the Quran oftentimes that are kept in these mosques on bookshelves throughout the mosque area itself. It's considered extremely inappropriate to put that on the floor. Islam attaches high significance to personal modesty and requires both men and women to dress in clothes that do not emphasize bodily contours. Women are also expected to cover their hair in many but not all Muslim women wear the headscarf known as the hijab for this purpose. The real purpose is just to notify yourself as somebody who believes in God and it's really respect for God that you do this for. You have to cover in front of men who are unrelated to you. So I uncover at home, you know, in home environments with family. If I was at the group of women, I wouldn't have to cover. Policemen should treat Muslim women with particular care and sensitivity about modesty and touching regardless of whether the hijab is worn or not. Muslim men and women are prohibited from being alone in a room with a person of the opposite sex with the door closed. So if it's necessary to interview somebody of the opposite sex whether it's, you know, male to female or female to male, it would be preferable to have another person in the room. Police will also find that many Muslim women and men will not shake hands and will avoid direct eye contact with members of the opposite sex. And that may be misconstrued as disrespect or a person is averting something or, you know, anxious about something. But in oftentimes what it is, is again the modesty that is prescribed as part of the way Muslims conduct themselves, whether they are men or women. The headscarves and long skirts worn by some Muslim women lead to erroneous assumptions that Muslim women are somehow oppressed. A lot of times people think that Muslim women haven't really had much experience or are not allowed to do many things, and I think that it couldn't really be further from the truth. Nothing holds me back as far as being a Muslim woman. I mean once you really study Islam, if you're in university and take the classes you'll see that Islam basically was the first women's liberation movement. It helped the poor, it helped the women from being oppressed. They can own their own businesses, they can own their own property, they were given voting rights from the very beginning in the Islamic tradition. And Muslim boys and girls are equally cherished and keep their parents equally busy. Our children go to school, my daughter is a typical teenager, she's fascinated with basketball, she plays for the school team. Both my children are into tennis, they follow it very closely because that is one of my avocations aside from work and other community work. Like Muslim women, Muslim men wear a variety of dress. Head coverings such as kuffis, skull caps or turbans are not religious requirements but cultural preferences. For a man to remove his hat or that which is covering his head is much less of an issue in public than it is for a woman. Many Muslim men also grow beards in deference to the Prophet Muhammad. Cultural dress does not necessarily mean the person is foreign. Assumptions based on a person's clothing should be avoided. Muslims aren't necessarily from somewhere else. Just because a woman wears a headscarf doesn't mean she came off the boat from somewhere. Because a lot of times people meet me and they think, oh this is a foreigner, she doesn't know how to speak English, she's not educated and then I turn out to be pretty normal. Dr. Lena Shabendar was in fact born here and educated at Northwestern University. Muslims are valued members in all professions. I was born in Jordan, I lived there for the first ten years and then I immigrated to the United States and I've been living here for the last 23 years. I've been a policeman with the Chicago Police Department going on six years. My brother is a policeman. I have a lot of good friends who are police officers that speak Arabic and they put the life on line for the American public. Police officers, doctors, teachers, attorneys, parents, students, volunteers. Muslims integrate the tenets of their faith into all aspects of their lives. When I come into work I cannot leave my Islamist city for lack of a better term outside.  All of those values come with me. In addition I've got to follow the traditional rituals of practice. Muslims, just like people of all faiths, expect police officers to exhibit those same values. I want my son to always feel that an officer is someone he can trust, he can look up to and he can call and not fear. And police need to be sensitive to an increased fear among Muslims in light of current world events. I think a lot of explanation on part of the police officer or a sense of reassuring them that this is just a routine stop will go a long way in, you know, allaying some of those concerns. As a police officer there are many religious and cultural considerations to keep in mind when dealing with people of the Islamic faith. The five daily prayers are an important part of Muslim life and are done in a prostrate position. Fridays are the holiest days for Muslims and large crowds gather at mosques. Muslim men and women may avoid direct eye contact with members of the opposite sex and many prefer not to shake hands. Unless there are safety or security concerns, the following considerations are recommended. Remove your shoes when entering the prayer area of a mosque because modesty is highly valued in Islam. If possible, Muslim men and women should be interviewed by officers of the same gender and Muslim women should be allowed to remove their head scarves in private whenever possible. Also keep in mind some Muslims have an increased fear of law enforcement due to anti-Muslim sentiment following terrorist attacks by foreign Islamic extremists. All of the people we encounter on a daily basis expect to be treated with dignity and respect. Those who practice the Islam faith are no exception. It is our hope that this video will serve to enlighten and foster a new awareness and understanding. Thanks for watching and as always, stay safe.


Hi, everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com. Happy Wednesday coming at you with 2020 Panini Select Baseball. The second half of that case, we popped open a little bit earlier today. Remember, I marked all those PYT6. All right, so big thanks all of these folks for getting into the action, really appreciate it. There's a second half of the list right there. All right, and remember, all cards ship. You can see right there, all card ship, right? And that's what we're looking for per box. On average, of course. A couple nice baseball breaks.  And now we have this half case right here. Card ship, Dakota Hudson to 149 will also ship. That won't ship, Raphael Devers to 35, Red Sox, and Eson Diaz to 209, Jersey and Otto. Nice one for Matt Stubblefield in the Marlins. Aaron Nola to 199, Phillies. And we got Tress Borea to 49. Three color jersey and autograph. I don't think, I don't believe I've ever heard this. I heard this guy here. That goes to Jeff and the Nationals. Kobe Bryant, what a game. I should have DVR'd this. Mookie Betts to 149. Piece of his jersey, Red Sox jersey. Will he ever have a daughter's jersey? Derek Disser with Boston. There's Yati to 99 for the Cardinals from Matt McCrae, last spot Mojo. And nice Mauricio Dubon, three color patch. Atomic Refractor, 15 out of 25. No, sorry, cracked ice. This is a Panini product. Sorry, Panini. Too many, it's been a long day. Been a busy day. Good luck. Box two, pick your team six. Nick and Knight will be coming up after this, ladies and gentlemen, so get your orders in on jaskiescasebreaks.com. Put him to work, boys and girls. I don't think we've, we usually have 90% of the time we should have something sold out for him. He does have a Salopak break he can knock out, but usually we have at least a few full breaks sold out for him. So get into the action, ladies and gentlemen. jaskiescasebreaks.com, put him to work. Watching Kobe's last game. There's the 199 Jack Flaherty for the Cardinals. Joey Votto, tri-color. Jordan Alvarez, silver. Kettle Marte, tie-dye. Matt Sebelfield in the Diamondbacks with the Kettle Marte tie-dye to 20. Excellent season for him last year. Mary Lou with the Astros. Jordan Alvarez, premier level, silver. Those are pretty nice. And Matt with the Jack Flaherty, Captain Jack Flaherty. We got Willie Castro to 99. Jersey and autograph for Detroit. That'll be for Charles. Ken Giles to 99. We got Abraham Doro. Jersey and autograph for Houston. Another one for Mary. 166 out of 209. We got Aristides Aquino. Oh, I thought we were gonna have to make there. To 250. Let's get baseball back. I wanna see if he's that big power hitter that we saw last year. I want that to continue. David Dahl to 149. Dennis Foley has the reds. David Dahl will go to Angus and the Rockies. And we might have to have new Jaspy Nick and night shirts. There's Patrick Sandoval for the Halos. That's gonna be for Dustin Colley. Paul Goldschmidt. All right, halfway through this half case break. Bigger team, six, 20-20 select baseball. Good luck. It's Givenchy only? Wow. All right, I guess the shirts will only be, so, what, that's like $1,000 shirt. All right, there'll be Givenchy shirts. 1,000 bucks a pop. Although Givenchy, got some nice hoodies. Pop a Jaspy logo on the back. One of those, woo. Fire. Like the NBA players to wear that. Ooh, Jaspy's would be lit. Yeah, Givenchy X Jaspy's. Woo, limited edition on that too. Would love to have Givenchy sponsor the natural grass-major golf course. We got a Maz and Bum Garner Arizona edition. Silver die cut, not numbered. Diamond level, the shorter of prints, the shortest of prints. That goes to Matt Stubblefield and the Diamondbacks. Gio Arcella to $1.99. Logan Allen to $2.09. Jersey Nautograph Cleveland, that'll be for Ian. Marcello Ozuna for the Cardinals, Matt McCray. That's a tri-color Ozuna too. We got Shogo Akiyama, Cincinnati with that one. That will be for Dennis and the Reds. And again, Kobe with the 60 and the dub. We got Adrahan Morihon, Adrian going to the Padres, Derwin with the Friars. We got Chocolate Brown, Relic there, Kersh, 11 out of 50, White Prism for the Dodgers. Wyatt's got my Dodgers. Kyle Lewis, Crisp White Jersey there for the M's Tony with Seattle. And the redemption is, boom. Luis Robert, nice. Rookie Jersey autographs for the White Sox, Josh Hall. Some Zebra, see that? Miss Kobe Bryant. Charlie Blackman, Zebra. That'll be for the Rockies, Angus. Mitch Garver to $35. And Yordon Alvarez to $2.09. Jersey and Otto for Mary. And the Strohs, nice. $1.90 out of $2.09. For a Polanco to $1.99. That'll be Twins, Jared Kay. Rico Garcia, $1.55 out of $1.99 for the Giants, Sanford with the Higantes. Matt Boyd to $1.49, Tigers.  Got some Ranny Johnson type height, hair and power in his arm. Going to Matt and the A's. Lyme Green, Logan Allen for Cleveland to $1.99. That'll be for Ian and the Tribe. Brendan McKay, future two-way player, who I hope for the Tampa Bay Rays. That's going to be for Tom. Tom and Tampa Bay. Nico Goodrum, Luis Robert in the back. Two more to go. Pick your team six. Yeah, Will Christian, rate to AJ Puck. Think he'll be good, same as McKay. It'll be cool to see how the Rays deploy Brendan McKay. Maybe there's a template that the Angels created with Joe Natani, it'll be cool to see. All right, second to last box, good luck. Jesus Lazardo to $1.49. Five out of 10, Kirby Yates, and hello to you too, EA. Sorry about that, man, it happens. You know this. All right, there's Yates to $10. Lazardo to $1.49. I think A's have got a really young crew here too. 209, Jordyn Yamamoto, jersey and autograph, Miami. Matt Subblefield. Mugi Betts to $1.99. Nick Solak to $209. Jersey and autograph. That will be Rangers Edition. That's going to go to Rob Carruthers. Juan Soto for Jeff Dorlak. Jersey. Nationals, $75. Some good color there too. There's Davie Guion to $1.49. Matt Subblefield, Sean Murphy, Jersey. A's, Matt Bodner, and one more box to go. That Kobe final year team was not very good. Last box, select six, good luck. Here we go, Willie Castro. White prism to $50. Lance Lynn, cracked ice. TJ Zook, jersey and autograph for Toronto. That's going to be for Dustin Colley and the Blue Jays. Blue Lance Lynn for the Rangers to $1.49. Rob Carruthers, $68.99. Joe Palumbo, jersey and autograph for the Rangers. Another Ranger for Rob. There you go, Rob. Closing the breakout strong. He's doing all this Bowman baseball and all the select baseball. It just makes you remember just how many there's Rizzo for the Cubs. That goes to EA. Looks like Mother's Day, right there. Pink jersey. It's not numbered, but game warm. But it just shows you a lot of young players that I want to see that we're not going to see too much of this season if at all. Aquino, I mean Julio Rodriguez could have gotten a cup of coffee if there was a, you know, I mean, that's a lot of players. Nick Solak, another Ranger. Rob Carruthers finishing this box strong. Cole Hamils. Yellich. And Jordan Alvarez. Hi, Kobe. All right, there you go, ladies and gentlemen. 2020 Select Baseball in the books. I always pick your team six. Thanks for watching. I'm Joe. I'll see you next time for the next break. Bye-bye. Bye, Kobe.