I'm Michael Miller, Cannabis Editor for the LA Weekly and Associate Publisher and here at the Green Market Summit hosted by the Green Market Report. And today we have the honor and privilege of interviewing a number of retired athletes, care of athletes for care, the preeminent advocacy organization for health and wellness of retired athletes and one of the greatest advocacy organizations in the non-profit space associated with the benefits of cannabis, CBD and health and wellness. Today I'm thrilled to be with Riley Coat, one of my hockey heroes from the day and Riley is going to tell us a little bit about his personal journey, his personal journey through the sport, transitioning out of the sport and what he's doing today. Pleasure to see you Riley. Yeah, thanks for having me. Good to see you as well. It's a pleasure man. So what is going on with you these days? Oh man, a lot of traveling. Yeah, I've been all over the map just along with the athletes for care program, education and I don't want to have to drive CBD brand as well, it's keeping me on the move so it's been fun. You found a good CBD brand to help you out? Absolutely, yeah. That's exactly what this mission kind of paid for me, it was providing sustainable alternatives to the traditional protocols of medicine. I think the cat's out of the bag that we've been systematically and fundamentally misled when it comes to managing chronic pain and inflammation, anxiety and sleep and there's clearly better alternatives for that and I think the cannabis and hemp plant have proven to be a solution for those types of symptoms. No question, well thanks to folks like yourselves. Let's press the rewind button a little bit. Back to the day, how many years did you play in the league? I played eight years of professional hockey and four with the Philadelphia Flyers, retired in 2010 at the age of 28, laundry list of physical injuries, I was a fighter, you know, banger grinder and I had my fair share of concussions through the fights and it kind of pushed me into the space of self-discovery and healing and really… Spiritually too, I think. Really spiritually, absolutely, yeah, that's a big, big part of it, you know. I think what I've learned from sports is that it's very egocentric and you're so worried about yourself and this identity of an athlete in this case and you know when that's over you have to redesign yourself, reinvent yourself and find yourself in a sense. So there was a sense of ego death but also, you know, really finding myself outside of the game of hockey and then really finding my own personal health. Sure. Let's talk a little bit about the recovery process and the healing process when you were in the league. Clearly the NHL had a strict policy with respect to any form of cannabis. I imagine that cannabis was still used by athletes quietly or wink, wink to get through their injuries but the biggest problem as I understand is being pushed consistently, narcotics or opiates to maintain your physical strength and to get you back on the ice. Is that an accurate representation? That is very accurate, yeah. For me personally, I think I've been blessed. I was introduced to cannabis at a young age and have had a relationship with it for some time, you know, through my junior hockey career and then into my pro hockey career in all leagues including the NHL. NHL was the only league that I had got tested for THC but nonetheless it was a real strong ally of mine in the midst of, you know, the toxic, you know, pharmaceuticals that were kind of dealt out through the locker room. So I think I had an advantage because I had a relationship with cannabis previous to being introduced to this world of pharmaceuticals which I hadn't been introduced to before I turned pro. So using cannabis, especially when I turned pro, it really started to speak to me. I really started to understand what it was doing especially when I turned pro I started fighting, fighting for a living and that's when I really started to identify with the therapeutic and medicinal benefits that the cannabis plant was giving me, just calming the nervous system, managing the anxiety night before a fight in the game and then helping me sleep. So that was when I really started to understand that there was something more than what had been told, you know, fast forward to when I was with the flyers, we were getting tested three or four times a year and I was still using cannabis on a regular basis. It was one of those things that I had kind of understood the drug testing that they really weren't penalizing people that were getting tested for THC, talking to other teammates and opponents and friends in the league. It was one of those things that it was risk versus reward. So I just ran the risk just knowing that I potentially could get slammed for this but I knew how it was helping me cope with the daily grind of life, let alone the daily grind of professional sports. So luckily enough, I didn't ever have the substance abuse program call me up and throw me in there but it certainly helped. But the challenge for me when I made the NHL was traveling via plane and that's when I started kind of leaving my cannabis products behind and started to just kind of adapt this, well, the traditional way of managing the recovery process and that was with anti-inflammatories and Ambien and that whole bit. So that's when I really started to really understand how cannabis was affecting me in a positive way and how these pharmaceutical drugs were really impacting me in a negative way. They were trying to accomplish the same thing but one is a spirit-driven plant and the other one is spiritless medicine that really has a lot of side effects. For me it was very obvious. I think for people that hadn't consumed cannabis previous it was hard for them to understand. So when I retired I guess I had an advantage if you would call it that where I already knew how I was feeling between the two of them and I knew which direction I wanted to go and I just made a choice and that was the beginning of my path and the space. And what came first, the idea to launch a product line or your advocacy? Did a light bulb go off for you? What in you Riley said? I've learned but I also want to help and teach other people. Yeah, the advocacy and education were way before the product line. I retired in 2010, 2011 I started a non-profit called the Hemp Heels Foundation really focusing on nutrition, the hemp nutrition, the digestibility of the hemp seed, the nutritional profile and then bleeding into the industrial applications and then I started to understand these non-psychotropic cannabinoids like CBD. So the first five, six years even before Athletes for Care was formed was just strictly pounding the pavement, talking about cannabis and all its forms and how it can help not just public health but environmental and economic health as well. And then eventually my advocacy efforts led to really the foundation and platform of the sports world and started meeting these other athletes, different sports that had similar stories, similar experiences with cannabis in one way, shape or form and the circuit continued and then we made it official and created an organization called Athletes for Care to really hone in on specifically the athlete creating a support system, offering alternative medicines but not selfishly just for athletes, using that platform to magnify this public health crisis that we've created in the West here specifically but also to engage in research initiatives for the general public. The common man has the exact same symptoms as the athlete. Pain is pain, inflammation is inflammation and the list goes on. So it's just really using that, I say the powerful position of the athlete and the platform of the athlete to really bring this message home. You're terrific and so you're in a period of advocacy, you're retired. What's the light bulb moment where you say, I want to do my own thing. I'm looking for things that will help me and I think I can do it better than what's out there. Well I think it was 2013 when I started to be introduced to actual CBD products when I started actually experimenting and it's been since then that I've actually been using them but it was then, I guess when 2014 came around when that previous Farm Bill had been signed into law where I went state by state, I saw this market really starting to form itself and I wasn't sure if I needed to get into it right now or at that moment I kind of positioned myself to kind of explore and see where this was going. So the idea was planted in say 2013, 2014 in that range. I didn't actually launch our product line until last year. There's a lot of education advocacy. There's really a lot of vetting, whether farmers or processors and I really want to stand behind a quality product and set that standard of not just selling out to Joe Blow's white label solution and that was really part of it too, was just navigating the real players and the imposters so but it's always been there for a long time. It's just manifest in the last year and a bit. So tell us a little bit about the product itself. Absolutely, so a company is called Body Check Wellness and we're a wellness company really focusing in on hemp extract and fused hemp capsules and topicals. We wanted to separate ourselves a little bit, not just being a CBD oil company so we do obviously really take pride in that portion of it but being progressive and being honest that Mother Nature offers more than just the hemp and cannabis plant as a healing tool. So as we know Mother Nature has given us an array of different healing herbs, roots and plants to increase our wellness and longevity and we wanted to really separate ourselves with entering the fungi kingdom. So one of our products is somewhat unique. I would think it's a full spectrum hemp capsule infused with the six different mushrooms all clinically proven for brain health, clarity, focus, endurance, immunity. So really tapping into that world knowing that the mushroom kingdom is essentially, I say untapped, it's just like cannabis I guess it's misunderstood and there's a lot of connection between the two if you want to look at the nutritional element of mushrooms and comparing it to the hemp plant and then getting into the medicinal side and getting into the industrial applications and economics. So mushrooms are very, very powerful as you read about them and learn about them and they're ancient as ancient as the cannabis plant. So just wanted to really focus on the brain, brain health. In my previous life I was a fighter, I said earlier and I've been punched in the face many of times so just really trying to... You can't tell your nose is perfect. Oh, perfect for this angle and then you put it in the light and it shows its true colors. Movie star Tom Cruise looks. Right, I've got a couple of different angles here. But yeah, really focusing on brain health. I'm obsessed with the brain, the concussion issue, the CTE. The US government holds a patent on cannabinoids as neuroprotectants and antioxidants so once you understand that and make some connections it makes a lot of sense for me, not just from an inflammatory standpoint but from a brain health standpoint to really focus in on that and create a product that supports that. This is one of the first products I've seen that combines both mushrooms and byproducts of the hemp plant. What was the catalyst for that? Do you have sort of a botanical background? Were you working with a team that made that suggestion or source, had some either anecdotal or some type of evidential data that the two of those combined would have a beneficial effect? Well, I think when I hopped on my journey of personal growth and spiritual development, I started taking a few classes through American Institute of Holistic Theology, started learning about just plant medicine in general, a little bit of Ayurvedic medicine and Chinese medicine and the mushroom is sacred. It's been around since the start of time. I think previous to plants, the fungi kingdom is kind of mastered this world so there's a ton of information and research on these different types of mushrooms for years so I was introduced to this information at the same time. I was introduced to these different elements of the cannabis and hemp plant. So I always had in the back of my mind, I was equally obsessed with the mushroom kingdom, then I was the plant kingdom and specifically the hemp and cannabis plant so when it was time to create a product, I had it in the back of my mind that I wanted to do that and I seen the products that were in the marketplace and there were a lot of the same exact things. It was just white labeling, just standard oil and we do have full spectrum oils and isolates and that which should work wonderful but this I just wanted to separate ourselves and have kind of a brain formula and just attack the market with something a little bit unique but it's always been a passion of mine. I love mushrooms equally as much as I do hemp and cannabis and I think the next big play is psilocybin in that world so we're getting there. Sure. What are the values that an athlete brings to the launch of a new business as an entrepreneur? I think the biggest thing is work ethic. They've got to drive their discipline if they're kept in their lane and they really do want to use their platform to do better. I think what I've learned is that these guys just need to be thrown in their lane, a lot of energy they have but when you're playing pro sports or any sport for that matter, everything is very regimented from the schedule they hand you at the start of the season, the daily schedule for video practice workouts, telling you what to wear, what to eat, everything is regimented for you so I think when you're on your own there's a little bit of a distracted behavior and I think athletes all have these unique qualities of work ethic and attitude and teamwork and it's powerful qualities but if it's not harnessed in the right direction it can get lost. So I think once I had this definitive purpose it was easy for me to take all these skills that I had honed for years and just being a pro and really started focusing those efforts on a specific product line that was outside of sports but nonetheless was able to use those as a powerful vehicle to help grow the brand. You're terrific. Let's talk for a minute about Athletes for Care. In addition to being an advocacy organization for health and wellness, tell me a little bit more about the multiple areas that Athletes for Care is interested in, the nature of folks that are involved and how our viewers can get involved and support the organization. Sure, Athletes for Care is a few layers now. Originally it started out as a support system for say retiring or retired players. We saw a lot of guys struggling with pain issues, identity crisis, substance abuse, and a lot of this stemmed off when they transitioned out of the game. They were dealing with pain and suffering with unsustainable resources, again the traditional medicines that we were talking about. So there's a lot of struggle, a lot of darkness there. So as that began to roll out, that's still part of what we do is helping these guys, offering education and introducing these guys to alternatives. Not just hemp and cannabis, there's many other alternatives as well, but that seems to be a primary focus of ours because it's very real and it works almost immediately. So just helping these guys fill their toolbox up with sustainable tools. And then it evolved into opportunity. As we know, the cannabis and hemp space has, there's a lot of opportunity and we're in the space of healing and helping others. So you talk about the ego death we talked about earlier and giving these guys a new definitive purpose, giving back and helping people in their communities and abroad. So that element, business opportunities, whether it was investment opportunity or job opportunities, job placement. And then just the research component, obviously we need some real tangible research to validate all these anecdotal stories we're all sharing. That component is not just again selfishly for the athletes. That's the research we want to get out to the general public because as we know, we all need this. We all need this and so there's a few arms, but the cannabis and hemp portion of it again are just the small pieces to the overall conversation of wellness. So we really talk about mindfulness in the sense of meditation and yoga and these mindful practices that help create healthier minds and people. Because as we know, it's not just one tool that's gonna help us. It's a series of tools and behaviors and I think going back to your last comment about athletes and to the product line space, they also have the same disciplines to take care of themselves and care for themselves. Unfortunately, their whole pro career and actually the whole careers in general have essentially been misled. So they've been accustomed to these unsustainable ways of managing themselves because it's a business of getting back on the field or back on the ice. It's not about longevity and it's not about sustainability. So if you can reprogram their minds with this discipline of how to take care of themselves, a lot of these guys have it in them to do that. It's just again, when you're in the business of sports, it's nothing to do with health, wellness and longevity. It's just about serving your position on the ice for that team in that moment and you're very replaceable. So you don't think like that at the time because you're so set on living out your dream and playing for the team and that whole bit. But once it's over, it's like, you really have to reevaluate the things that you were taught and how am I gonna make it in the real world now and with the stuff I've learned. Sure, final question Riley, which I imagine you think about often. Your sport, the NHL, if you look into the ice crystal ball and where you think the educational transition will be when there is an opening to accept the new world of the health and wellness benefits of the cannabis plant, how do you see that playing out with the league of the sport that you dedicated so much of your life to? I'd like to think the NHL is probably the most progressive when it comes to the major sports leagues. I don't always say that because the NHL Alumni Association signed a deal with Canopy Growth and they invested $20 million to study CBD in the brain that concussions and brain health for 100 retired players at least to start with. So at least they're proactive in that regards where that data is supposed to essentially push the Players Association to say, hey, we got some tangible data here and this is how it's helping our players which will ultimately move on to the NHL as an organization itself. So I'd like to think being in Canada with their say the progressive laws even though it's kind of fake legalization, nonetheless it is progress if you could call it that. It's on the radar for all these teams in the NHL so I'd like to think that the next year or two at the very least see them stop testing for THC. I think until the US federal government changes their stance, the complicated part is that border because they can't really endorse it because then all of a sudden it's like, well, now we're telling our players to travel with this and it's complicated but it's progressive compared to NFL even though they're using the cannabis and hem play as a bargaining chip for their collective bargaining agreement at least in the NHL world. There's some research going on so I think that's a start for sure. I'm keep pounding at home. I mean, I do my best to get in front of these guys. I've been in front of the original six alumni and just planting seeds. There's a lot of these old guys that really don't have a clue. They're hearing buzz words but there's still a lot of unknowns and misinformation around it so the more information we get out there, more education, even if it's not through the NHL itself or NHL alumni itself, it's one-on-one just helping guys out individually. It's really what it's all about because it's word of mouth because this stuff really does work and help one guy help another and help another. He helps another and it's contagious. It is contagious. So what I'm hearing is that we'll see a body check wellness and an athlete's for care commercial and the Stanley Cup playoffs well before the Super Bowl. Oh, I would love to see that. It'd be an absolute dream. I'd love to see it too. Well, Riley, thank you so much for coming today.  You're an icon and you're someone that people my age and my young son at 15 can look up to. Thank you for everything you do to push the ethics of the values of this plant and of basic human rights of revolving around compassion and the benefits for everybody. And thank you athletes for caring everything you do for that organization to providing advocacy and education. Really pleasure to be with you today and thank you for all you do. Thank you. I appreciate it. It's very nice.


You've got to sit down and talk to Bobby. He's getting rid of the liberal boss.  And that you just can't find anybody who thinks we ought to leave these boys out there and do nothing, and we can't give up. And we can't do it except give them what they need, Bob. Do you?


Alright guys this is the 4th film in the DCEU and where does it rank? My name is Brennan Keith-Avery and this is just my opinion. Alright guys welcome back and like I said this is the 4th film in the DCEU and a lot is riding on it because Man of Steel, Batman vs Superman and Suicide Squad overall had mixed reviews. I'll talk about my opinion on those films later but a lot of people are feeling like this Wonder Woman movie could break or make the cinematic universe for DC Comics. This movie is directed by Patty Jenkins. If you are familiar with her work she is most known for her film that she did called Monster with stars Charlize Theron and Christina Ricci about the prostitute that became a serial killer. Very eerie if you want to check that out you can but now she is doing Wonder Woman. Now my expectations for this film have been super high through the roof just for some reason when I first saw the trailer I just knew that this movie was going to be good. I couldn't help myself I thought it was just a great idea to have a woman director directing a woman you know like this is Wonder Woman but now we have a full length blockbuster feature of Wonder Woman and I just can't wait to talk to you about it. Now the first thing that I love about this film was Themyscira. Themyscira is the lost remote island that all the Amazons were siding in. They were created by a god named Zeus many many millennia ago or hundreds of years ago thousands of years ago whatever and they are just secluded on this island.   So I was really I was very surprised to see it I was happy I was like okay yeah go ahead and represent my sister you know all the good stuff so I'm glad there that they you know didn't just white wash the whole cast and they had some type of diversity.  Not the case here with these Amazon not only are they beautiful but they are all strong and super intelligent and they ain't taking no crap off of nobody and I love that I mean seriously I didn't know if I wanted to date one of them or if I wanted them to train me so I can survive in the streets or somebody try to come you know put a gun on my head or something like that because they're just that vast I mean in the world that they live in on them is scary I mean it is just beyond wonderful I mean I really want to go there seriously I mean after I see you know my I could imagine myself planning my next vacation based off how Themyscira looked you know I want to go to Hawaii or just some place around with some island no one ever I say Hawaii some island no one ever heard of so when I'm closing my eyes on the beach or whatever I can imagine that is Themyscira and one thing that I like about this movie is as soon as the action starts and you see it from the trailers when the world war and it takes place during the world war one where the evil Germans are rushing the beach and then you come see them riding on those horses and they are about to kick ass and one thing that I like a lot is you know I'm gonna take a little sidebar here for a second remember that movie the mighty ducks that came out in the early 90s with Emilio Estevez and what did they have in that movie that made them so success with what did they have in that movie that made them so successful it was the flying V and I can see that Emilio Estevez somehow went back in time to Themyscira and copied that technique because they work for him on the ice and they work for the Amazons on the beach when they were wrecking shot with these Germans as they were killing them I mean the action is just so precise they were doing some things and fighting techniques fighting in one just ways I've never seen before with rope and shields and I mean they didn't have any guns they just had bows and arrows and they were so thorough with those bows and arrows they were doing things with bows and arrows that I've never seen before in any movie and I'm not just saying you know pulling back the bow and letting the air pulling back the bow and letting the arrow fly into your enemy no they were just I don't want to spoil it for you here but all these jumping and flipping and twisting whatnot with these arrows it was very creative and I love the way they fought I mean it really showed they have been training all of their lives and they are just ready to kick some ass I mean you're not just going to run up on these women's beach what a fight I mean you're going to die viciously and I loved every moment of that now jumping back just a second before that was the training I love a movie with training and great training montages and it was just beautiful seeing Gal Gadot Princess Diana as a little girl and she's just so eager to help out and that just I mean that just gets you on board with her character immediately because just a sweet innocent little girl that won't harm a fly or butterfly or nothing and she just wants to help me I mean it's just like in her blood and her veins she is a fighter you know she's a demi god or god excuse me and she just wants to help she's like mom please train me I you know I don't want to read books no more you know just please train me and I just love that about her character she's humble she's sweet and that's just a great way to get you on board with Gal Gadot now her character Gal Gadot I will say that when she was announced when she was cast as Wonder Woman a few years ago at Comic Con I was pissed off I was angry I was frustrated like what the hell are you thinking Zach Snyder not Zach Snyder but the people that are over the decision you know at Warner Brothers like why would y'all cast this not I mean Wonder Woman I mean my goodness gracious it's Wonder Woman why would you cast some no-name actress that no one is ever heard of only time I've heard of her before was in Fast Five and I'm not saying that I want the Amazons of Wonder Woman to look like she hulks you know with muscles everywhere no but at the same time I want them to have some type of muscle tone some muscle definition and I will I'll just remember Gal Gadot you know in that one scene when she was trying to seduce that guy in that white bikini she was just too thin and I was like this is a halberd casting decision but I will humble myself and take it back that I was wrong Gal Gadot you wrecked it in this role and not just as Wonder Woman but as a character I believe every word of dollar that was coming out of your mouth it was genuine it was sincere and I am a believer when there was when there was a concern she emoted very well and showed great emotion in depth to her character and you know she was just really concerned with everything like no I believe in this and we got a fight here and how can you stand for this how can you call yourself a man you know I mean she was just really devin' in to her mother her trainer to Chris Pine which I'll get to in a second I really loved her character in her dialogue she wrecked the hell out of this role and the reason why I mean I'm saying that now is because of course she was in Batman v Superman which I have which I have right here you know she there wasn't a big role for her in that film which is fine but you really only got to see her as Wonder Woman I mean she did a great job as Wonder Woman you know showing up in uniform and her costume fighting but you really didn't get any character deaths from her in that film but in this film Wonder Woman you do and like I said she did a great job next thing I want to talk about is Chris Pine S.D. Trevor he did a great job as well and the chemistry between him and Wonder Woman Gal Gadot Princess Diana was just freaking flawless and hilarious I love every moment of it she they're both like a fish out of water to their own to each other's world or whatever and they play it off each other very nice I mean everyone is asking the right questions at the right time as if you would I mean if some people are rushing to beach okay you may not have enough time to talk all this out you want to fight and beat the bad guys and you want to talk later and he was asking all the questions that he should because it doesn't make sense why is this island here island here out of nowhere with all these women where are the men why are you guys so freaking powerful and strong what is this gold rope that you're wrapping me up with I mean he's asking all the necessary questions and then on the flip side Princess Diana Wonder Woman is doing the same thing and she's not just like an idiot like oh what is this contraption right here I mean she's not like a doofus I mean but she does ask you know questions that seem common sense to us but she's never experienced this before never seen a man before in her life and especially she's never seen a naked man and so you know I gave you a little nugget there but it's just hilarious and you know she's very intelligent in the way she uses her wits and you know tries to compare the knowledge that she's studied coming up as a young adult with books they had on the island comparing those with chris pines it's just hilarious and I love both of them together I mean it was just like a perfect match made in heaven and it couldn't have been any better to be honest with you between those two so the next thing that I want to talk about is the action and the action was already good towards the beginning of the field with the storming of the beach and I'm not spoiling anything for you here this you know pretty not you know pretty common knowledge that that takes place uh in the earlier part of the film but that scene where she's on the battlefield taking all that bullet fire with her shield from then on the action is just so well done I mean and what makes it so fun is she doesn't really know who she is or where she's coming from because she's she's she's an amazonian but she's really not and they kind of talk about that briefly in the film and excuse me and address it later but she really doesn't know who she is so when she's fighting it's fun seeing her discover her powers while she's in the middle of battle she's like oh snap I didn't I was trying to knock this guy out but I wasn't trying to knock him way over there and let me press pause in the action real quick because once it ends on the first scene towards the beginning of the movie it takes a while to get to the rest of the action but you're not bored at all kind of like man is still kind of how it kind of took a long time to get to the action and it just kind of blowing your head off you're not bored at all you're laughing and you're enjoying the dialogue and you're just enjoying seeing diana you know come to london and try trying to get equipped to everything around her or whatever that is just fun just seeing her interact with everybody and the other character eddy candy I mean that's just hilarious when she's in the shop trying on all the clothes uh that's just very funny when she's carrying her sword around and they're saying put this away it doesn't go with the outfit that's very funny and you're just loving the slow build and how the story is developing and how they're tying in this fake comic book character into the real world war one and you know they you know how they tie that together and try to mesh it all together I really did like that so when the action does come later it just makes it that much more impactful and like I said the action is top-notch I saw one review where one critic prior to this was talking about how he didn't like it how they were showing her action and then they kind of switched to a CGI character of Wonder Woman yes they did switch over to a CGI character to have her jumping around and flipping on a few sequences there but it didn't bother me at all it didn't clog me out of the movie and what I liked about the way they did that there or why they grounded it is why she is a CGI character they still surrounded her with other live action characters one being chris pine just to ground it so the whole thing doesn't seem like a video game while she's doing her last old truth swinging it all around on her sword and all this stuff like this there's somebody right next to her with a gun doing his things with his gun and batonette and all that and it just kind of you know it just it's all cohesive and it just it just flows very well and you know they're all thinking of one fighting one and I just love every moment of that and there's really not too much to complain about in the first two acts act one act two but one thing the two things that I will complain about coming act three is act three is just a little bit uneven when it does get to the climax to final battle I'm like oh okay we're here now because I knew where the film was going but I thought that they should have took a few more steps to get there and it just doesn't rev up you know the way that you wanted to I mean it's I mean it's kind of just like there was no warm up to it it was just there that's not a gripe but you know it could have been done a little bit better and flow smoothly. Another thing that I want to talk about that really just didn't I really didn't care for in the third act was where the line where the line of where the line of enemy lines beginning and end because you have your bad guys and you know your germans over here and you know who they're associated with but then again right down the street or not even that far it seems like you got some good guys over here and I'm just like okay why are they so close you know if the I mean if these guys are here they can just easily go attack these guys over here or if they sent this bomb over here they could have just done this a long time ago that I didn't really follow that too much and also the reveal of Aries towards the end it wasn't bad it was um it was a good reveal but they could have done a lot better and well I want to say a lot better they could have done better because the actual fighting was okay but they just kept stopping and starting it just didn't flow through and again I did not know where the line the I didn't know where the enemy lines began and ended I'm like wait a minute if there are bad guys over there and good guys over here why aren't they fighting and why aren't these good guys killing these bad guys and these bad guys killing these good guys it was just a little inconsistent there but the end battle it was nice you know still seeing Diana Wonder Woman discover all of her powers but at the same time with the reveal of Aries and you know he's in the movie they could have fleshed out out a little bit more and made I mean you just have to see it for yourself because I don't want to spoil it for you but he was threatening but they could have made him more threatening just kind of imagine and I'm exaggerating here so don't take this to heart but it's the best example that I can think of just imagine Pee Wee Herman in a bad guy costume okay the costume on the outside looks bad ass like oh damn you know I don't want to brought up on this dude he looked like he really effed me up but at the same time you look under all that you're like well it's still just Pee Wee Herman under that yeah he has all these powers and he's strong but it's still Pee Wee Herman that's kind of how I took it you know I don't want to just completely crap on it but it could have been a lot better but you know just to be honest with you doing the whole movie I'm gonna pretend laughing and smiling and teasing idiot like yeah this is like a nine territory 9.5 dancing back and forth just like that but you know when that third act came you know it kind of just dipped down a little bit now I can't really give it that high of a rating if I had to rate Wonder Woman out of a 1 out of 10 instead of great rating I would give it an 8.5 out of 10 yes an 8.5 out of 10 but guys that's just my opinion you may feel differently have you seen Wonder Woman do you want to see it how about turn juwan how about turn juwaf do you agree with me or do you disagree with me let me know in the comment section below let's get this conversation going to keep it flowing and just want to let you know there is no post-credits scene so you know you don't have to stay and you know waste your time if you want to pay respect to the other people that you know work hard on this movie you know go ahead and do that they work very hard for you but there is no post-credits scene I'm just letting you know DC Wonder Brothers they really don't do that but they should take a page out of Marvel's book and speaking about Marvel yes I do want to go to the red carpet premiere of Black Panther that comes out February of 2018 next year I love comic books I love Marvel I love Black Panther I'm Black and the movie comes out of Black History Month so that would just be a dream come true for me it's a likely chance I'll go who knows it's a long shot I know I'm going for it so help me out by sharing this video one thousand times and if you like this video go ahead and give me the thumbs up and if you don't like the video that's fine just leave me a comment below why and still give me a thumbs up since you're watching this on youtube go ahead and subscribe to my channel my youtube channel so you get all the content that I have to provide you can also go to my website book market and look me up on social media but guys this is the best film in the whole deep world oh let me let me stop there is it the best it's definitely one or two because I have bbs dawn of justice which the theatrical version was extremely disappointing but the extended three hour release was much better and they also have let me fix the mic back I also have man of steel I love this movie to death I loved it it was slow in the beginning and but when that action came I mean still to me ooh you know to me Captain America Civil War is the best action in any comic book movie and man of steel is a close second so do I want to say do I like Wonder Woman or man of steel more I definitely don't like Suicide Squad that was just garbage y'all I remember that crap right there you know I'm talking about shitty mess oh man so man of steel had better action Wonder Woman had a better overall story so I would say that I did like Wonder Woman overall more than man of steel so you know you can take that to the bank so guys again I just want to thank you again for tuning in for my hand slash review for Wonder Woman and before you go don't forget there my name is Brennan Keith Avery and that's just my opinion peace


from Austin, Texas. It's theCUBE, covering OpenStack Summit 2016, brought to you by the OpenStack Foundation and headline sponsors Red Hat and Cisco. Now here are your hosts, Stu Miniman and Brian Graceley. Welcome back to OpenStack Summit 2016 in Austin. This is SiliconANGLE Media's theCUBE. We go out to all the big shows, help extract the signal from the noise. Day one of three here at the event. Sixth year of the show. Our fourth year doing the event. Happy to have on two guests from Red Hat who have been on our program before. We've got Tim Eaton who's the SVP of Infrastructure Business Group and Radesh Balakrishnan, who's the general manager of OpenStack. Gentlemen, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for having us. All right, so what we were saying, boy, coming back to Austin, it's come full circle from 75 people kind of sitting around the corner here, talking about what they're building in code to 7,500 people, very different feel. Maybe, Tim, give us a little bit of your thoughts as to, how Red Hat thinks of this and what's going on with OpenStack? Well, it's almost a metaphor for what's happened in the market over the last several years. You look at, it's origins of 75 people here, just kicking around, technology ideas, that rack space and NASA had started, to now being 7,500 people, lots and lots of customers in production telling their stories at scale. We've got now with the verizers of the world, the largest, and a V implementation based on OpenStack, many others, so it's gone from its infancy to full production scale, and so is the show. So it's a really interesting parallel. All right, so Redesh, you're the GM of a group that's got OpenStack. So a lot of people looked, is there business in OpenStack? How will people make money? There were a whole lot of startups that came in and said we're going to topple this company or do that, stop in AWS or stop paying to VMware. How do you guys look at this as a business? At two levels, first is clearly there is a demand from customers for a standard distribution that has got a stable set of APIs with a vibrant partner ecosystem. So that's what we did for Linux and we're doing the same thing for OpenStack as well. To me, the even more exciting aspect is that customers are now realizing OpenStack is an ingredient to the end destination that they want to get to, and we are blessed with having a broad portfolio from storage to cloud management to platform as a service offering that can layer on top and around OpenStack so the customers can get to the, if you are a Gartner believer, a Mode2 or if you're an IDC believer, third platform or a pragmatic customer, a far more agile end destination. So to me, you got to look at the success of OpenStack from both the levels, how it unlocks the possibilities from getting to an agile infrastructure as well as just OpenStack distro itself. And on both counts, we've been very, very excited about the journey that has taken us this far and we are very bullish, continue to be bullish about OpenStack. Yeah, I think it speaks a lot to the maturity. Of course, in the early days, it's kind of this distro versus that distro because we're building the maturity. So we kind of get needed to get to a certain level but to now, it's really impressive to hear the discussion of this part of the overall solution. It's not about that tool, it's about the suites, it's about the platforms, it's about how you pull everything together. And a new use case as well, 18 months ago, I don't believe anybody was talking about NFE and Telco but now look at us. We just announced Verizon is one of the largest deployment from an NFE perspective. There are carriers across the globe by default looking at OpenStack as the way to power their infrastructure when it comes to NFE, right? So any which way you look at it, customer adoption, partner momentum or community growth, it's been a phenomenal journey so far. Yeah, when this first got started, there was obviously with any new technology innovation, a lot of bravado, there's talk of, OpenStack is the Linux of the cloud. It's, you know, and it was interesting, Jonathan Bryce today in the keynote said, look, you know, OpenStack, while it's getting into multiple use cases, like you mentioned, really, it sort of has its place.  What do you, what do your customers tell you they want OpenStack to be in that? How do they look at it? You know, we tend to look at it as it's got a certain place in a cloud stack, but how do you, what do your customers sort of tell you about OpenStack or what do they want it to be? Sure, so I think it starts with customers thinking about, you know, what applications they're trying to stand up, you know, net new and what infrastructure is required to enable that. So I think, you know, as we were talking about before, they're taking a much more holistic view in terms of, you know, I'm going to be hybrid. I think most of the analysts today will tell you that 90% of large IT organizations expect to be hybrid with on-prem infrastructure and public cloud infrastructure and all variants in between. OpenStack, of course, I think as Radesh was alluding to, you know, serves a couple of key roles in that. One, it is the, you know, private cloud infrastructure of choice for most large organizations, whether they're all the way to production or not. I mean, the statistics that we see here every six months, just bear that out that OpenStack is the bet for private cloud infrastructure. And as Radesh was saying, it's also the bet that the world's, you know, telco industry is moving toward as they go to software to find. So you've got half of the public cloud on this infrastructure as a scale out technology. Most of the private clouds and large enterprises being based on that. And then what they're looking to do is, okay, how do I turn that into a dynamic hybrid cloud environment? What do I have to add in terms of management? What I have to add in terms of higher level services, in our case, things like OpenShift. So the conversations we're having with customers now are much more holistically around OpenStack as an element to defining their next generation of hybrid cloud architecture. Yeah, one of the things, obviously, Red Hat's done, we talked about it earlier with Chris Wright, Red Hat's done, you know, not only, you know, one of the biggest contributors to OpenStack and a number of projects, but a number of acquisitions, everything from Ansible to SEF and a whole bunch in between. How much, beyond just the technology stack, how much does it help Red Hat to have always been an open source company? You know, we see a lot of other vendors who are trying to go, well, I'm going to adopt it, but they're struggling from a business model perspective. How much does that help you guys to go, I don't really have to think about any change, I'm just delivering technology and solutions. Well, I think it's, you know, you almost can't overstate its significance. So you think about just OpenStack and the evolution here in the last couple of years. You know, you know, Chris of course, you know, epitomizes community development, but there are some things that are tough for communities to do, right? They don't think about, you know, fit and finish around installation and day two management. It's not part of the innovation cycle. User experience, you know, upgradeability and those sorts of things. So, you know, most of the communities are centered around innovation. You know, being an open source company from the get go, we knew that there were going to be challenges in terms of how one would engender life cycle into a platform that's delivering new innovation every six months and never looking back, right? And it comes to, you know, there's certainly been bravado about who does the most commits and all that kind of stuff. And that's not ever been interesting to us. Our strategy is we want development expertise on every single OpenStack module, so we know how fixes that we make in productizing it are going to make it back upstream, how to backport features and bug fixes from, you know, L and M and beyond, back to those that we have in production three years prior. I think those are all things that come very naturally for us. And if you look at OpenStack as a community, there were some stumbles among those trying to productize OpenStack early on that I think we're all getting better at. But for us, we had 15 years of learning on how to do that. Yeah, so, Tim, I'm wondering if we could talk about a little bit more on the customers. We always come to these events and say, okay, how many of them are actually running into production? You know, how are they making their decisions? So, you know, there's general, generally people say, oh, well, you know, Red Hat, you know, has customers that are using Linux and they've got their support licenses. So natural progression to move over at OpenStack. How many customers is it just kind of that natural progression? How many are looking at OpenStack and end up in one of the various solutions that you guys offer? And, you know, maybe there are any insight you can talk as to kind of the mindset as to how customers, you know, are they coming to OpenStack or is that just part of the overall picture? Sure, I'll start. So in case I say something that gets us in trouble, you'll be able to talk to Redesh in six months. So, you know, I think one of the things that we've seen, you know, quite evident in the last six to 12 months of the business is acceleration and growth. And, you know, we're on a scale. We've, you know, said this publicly of several hundred production customers and in our case, unlike others, a production customer is one who's bought a subscription for production deployment. So, you know, we don't have, you know, our services capabilities around OpenStack are very focused to successful production deployment. So we don't handcraft, you know, snowflakes. So when we say we have, you know, two or two to three X more than any of the next largest reported provider, it's of real production configuration. So, and I think that the fact that we're seeing scale and we're seeing acceleration and growth are the things that make us incredibly optimistic about the business. Just to add to that, right? So we're kind of seeing three entry points. One is the classic Alas Expected. We've got RHEL, you know, either in the physical or physical as well as virtual. We want to get to private cloud and public cloud. So that's an obvious journey. Another intersect point is they are interested in hybrid cloud management and or, you know, storage, software defined storage solution or software defined networking with our partner solution. So that becomes a, you know, that's a fundamental retooling of the infrastructure itself. And a third and an emerging driver or a calling card that we've been getting is around containers, right? So clearly there's a lot of excitement around it and that's more from the application layer impacting decisions of the infrastructure layer as well. So those tend to be a mix of fair mix of existing customers as well as new customers. Hopefully that gave you the flavor you were looking for. So Radesh, I'm wondering if you can help us dig in one area, you talked about hybrid cloud.  Absolutely, I mean, for the past three, four years our value proposition to the customer has been open hybrid cloud, open because of who we are and hybrid cloud because we long recognize that taking either a private cloud camp or a public cloud camp is to kind of narrow minded view of the world, right? We all know that there are workload specific requirements, organizational specific requirements that will decide the choice in terms of whether you're going one way or other. What we've been focused on is actually making sure that our entire portfolio is geared towards enabling that hybrid experience. Let's take storage, for example, where you can run, you know, SAF on-prem or you can run it on a public cloud environment or you take cloud management as an area, cloud forms, which is our solution, which will help customers bridge, let's say, legacy investments in VMware implementation all the way up to, you know, newer public cloud implementation as well. So it's been a systematic focus on enabling at all levels of the layer the reality and of the power of hybrid cloud. That's been our focus, Tim, do you want to add to that? Yeah, so Stu, first of all it's a great question. I think it's something that we've seen evolve over the last year. I would say a year ago when I would talk to customers, they were just thinking about what this would look like as you expanded it out to the public cloud. Today, what you hear is exactly what you said, which is most big customers I talk to, the public cloud of their hybrid strategy is going to be multi-cloud, for all the reasons that you'd expect. But in order to do that effectively, and you can build a hybrid cloud with workloads on public cloud in a couple of ways. One is very statically. So I make a choice to move a workload, or build a workload on AWS. I use all the native AWS services. It's fairly static. Once it's there, it's not going anywhere because those services on it replicated elsewhere. So what customers have been talking about more and more and more is what abstraction layers can we create for them that make it easier to have a more dynamic hybrid cloud with choice among the public cloud providers? So the first level of abstraction is real guests themselves. You've got a consistent operating environment on each of those platforms, but its limitation is you've got to stay true to the native APIs and Java APIs and so forth. The next level of abstraction winds up becoming containerization itself because now you've got much more flexibility to make the applications of itself more frying grain, share different components. But I think the most highest level of abstraction is OpenShift itself managed by cloud forms because now I can have a full on dev and dev ops and deployment environment where all the services are exposed by that platform. You don't necessarily need to use native services of any of those public clouds. And now I've got workloads that could be dynamically moved back on-prem or among those public clouds depending on what you don't want it to find by policy. And in our particular case, the same management framework that enables that is also the one that can manage your traditional infrastructure. So it's more than just hybrid cloud. In our case, it's really hybrid IT having the existing applications be relevant in the new fabric. So, as a general manager, you're running the business but you've got to sort of always have your crystal ball in front of you. We heard in the keynote today, you have JPL as a customer, they're trying to figure out how to put life on Mars. You've got Verizon as a customer who's trying to manage a billion new phones getting turned on every day. And then you had Gartner talking about, hey, we're going to have to help customers move their SAP and Oracle. How do you think about those very distinct things? Do you feel like over time we're going to have carrier grade open stack and man on the moon open stack and enterprise apps open stack? Or is it flexible enough that people can go, okay, I'm just betting on open stack and it'll work itself out? How do you think about that? So we're going to do everything within our power to make sure that the forking and application specific variants of open stack doesn't happen. Let's look at what we did in the last 18 months around telco NFE itself. There were other players in the market who took the approach of assembling a carrier grade solution with a mix of proprietary as well as open technologies. What we desired from day one was the best thing we can do is to make sure that we make open stack carrier grade rather than try to get to a carrier grade open stack. So hopefully that gives you the flavor of how we think about it. And that's not something that we have to struggle hard to do because our philosophy always has been upstream first, right? Anything that we do is upstream first. So there is no shadow code tree, there is no modes that we're going to build by having a specific workload specific requirements. Now that said, there are going to be unique requirements for each of the use cases that we identify prioritize and drive upstream as well as partner with industry specific partners to make sure that we round out our solution, right? So that's our game plan. So forward-looking, just like what we've done with telco, any new use cases, we're going to take exactly the same approach and make sure that we are not killing the golden goose, if you will. Yeah, that's true. So, you know, build the best open stack possible, work with the community and partner where it makes sense to get into those areas that are sort of unique and differentiated. Very good. And if you think about them, there's certainly the NFE specific elements that are going to be unique to the telco market. But a lot of where there's interest now is actually universally applicable. So a lot of the work around high availability, predictability and real time, those have their applications beyond just the vertical that's driving those requirements today. So we feel very confident that the model's going to hold well in an open stack context. Right, all right. So I always call this time of year kind of our open source tour. So we were at the Open Compute Summit, we're here. By the time we get to the end of the spring tour, we're going to be at Red Hat Summit. So I want to give you guys each a chance, kind of last word here, either something cool going out the show or something to look forward to at the Red Hat Summit. Tim, you want to start? I'll start and I'll turn it over to Rajesh. So I think, you know, because our Red Hat Summit, you know, closely follows the open stack summit, you know, we always, you know, we want to provide enough news here so people can see, you know, what's happening, what's changing, but the amount of news and new introductions that's going to be piled up for Red Hat Summit I think is unprecedented, you know, in this space, in adjacent spaces, but I think it's all, you know, with an eye toward how customers are moving to real production cloud environments. Here we talked about a number of ours that are open stack centric, but you know, when we get to the summit, you know, it'll be times 10 in terms of the amount of new customers, the amount of, you know, new product announcements. But I think even what we did here this week, we introduced a lot of really, you know, OSPA, the cloud suite, I think those are important indicators of where we're going, and we had a huge number of production customers that we wanted to, you know, have the world know about to see that this really is real and accelerating. So personally, I'm excited about the fact that the founders of open stack, Rackspace, as well as NASA, have given ringing endorsement of the value that Red Hat can bring to the table. So to add to what Tim was saying, our focus in making sure that more and more customers across multiple verticals can continue to see the power and realize the benefit of open stack, you know, be it Betfair in the UK, or Air France, or BBVA, Santander Bank, the list keeps increasing. And what we've also seen in the last year is that the scale of deployments also have gone from tens to hundreds, and now we're talking thousands in terms of deployment. So clearly the best and exciting time to be in the open stack space, as well as the cloud infrastructure space, from my perspective. Great. Well, Redesh and Tim, thank you so much for joining us on this segment. We'll be back with lots more coverage here from OpenStack 2016 in Austin, Texas. You're watching theCUBE.


All right, thank you for the introduction of this work. Can everyone hear me? Cool. So the purpose of this work is we want to try and construct an obfuscation scheme that we can prove from standard assumptions without coming up with something new. And we'll try and do this for a more limited function class that will still be non-trivial to obfuscate. So why do we care about obfuscation? I suppose you've written some amazing piece of code, and you want everyone to run it. And maybe it'll reduce carbon emissions and help save the environment. The problem is within your code, maybe you have a cryptographic secret key, and you don't want people to read a part of your code and learn something from that. So an obfuscation scheme will do something like the following. We'll take this and then return code that is guaranteed so that you can only treat it as a black box. We want the user to only get input, output, query access to the code. And if I run any algorithm that does a partial evaluation or tries to read some bits of memory, this should just give you a randomness that you could otherwise simulate without seeing the code itself. So if you could do this for any arbitrary fix function, this is the standard notion of virtual black box obfuscation. Now unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your perspective, this is not possible in general for all circuits, but it is still possible for maybe some limited function classes such as point functions. So as the previous talk was mentioned, like most of the follow-up work on obfuscation has been on trying to come up with a weaker notion of obfuscation I.L. and trying to do this for general circuits. So we're going to take the opposite direction in this work, and we're going to ask the question, let's say we start from VBB for point functions. What's the most complex function class that we can still obfuscate from something like VBB without coming with a new assumption? So specifically, we're going to use a notion of distributional VBB, and we're going to look at the following function class, which we call pattern matching with wildcards. So here's how the function class works. Let's say you're trying to evaluate your input on an n-dimensional Boolean vector. So a pattern is going to be an n-dimensional length n string where the character set is 0, 1, or star. So if we didn't have the star character, this is exactly a point function. It outputs 1 if it agrees with the 0, 1 on the input. Now with the star character, we essentially ignore the dimensions that are stars. So you can think of it as projecting out those dimensions, and then just doing a point function of the remaining. And importantly, we want w, the number of wildcards, to be large, to be a constant fraction. If w was small, then this would just be a union of two point functions, and I wouldn't be standing here talking. So here's an example. Let's say for a length 6, you have 0, 1, star, star, 0, 1 is your pattern. So any input that agrees with the first two or last two bits is going to be 1. It doesn't matter what the middle two bits are. But if you have 1 in the first bit, then this is going to help with 0. So hopefully, function class is clear. OK, so just some possible applications of why this function class might be useful. Suppose you're trying to check code for a security flaw. And the non-wildcard slots sort of indicate where the security flaw is. So if a person has a security flaw, you want them to be able to detect in the code, but you don't want to tell everyone where the non-wildcard slots are because then everyone else who does not already have this problem can then go and try and look for it. So this function class was previously studied under the name of obfuscating conjunctions. And in the past, the schemes were constructed based on multilinear maps and based on something called the entrapment LWE assumption. So we want to get an obfuscation scheme for the same function class, but just in the generic group model. So on one hand, the assumption will be easy to understand. On the other hand, the construction itself will be much simpler to describe and implement because it will essentially just be computing some number and exponentially using a group oracle and then multiplying those. So the definition of security that we're going to use is distributional VBB. So as I mentioned earlier, VBB was for if we could fix any function and then obfuscate it. So here instead of the function itself, we're going to allow that to be sampled. So let me just say specifically what this is for our function class. We have this pattern sigma of 0, 1 star. So you can imagine some sampling scheme of how I sample this length and string. You can sample each character slot individually from the three possible choices independently. You could fix the number of wildcard slots and sample a subset, however you want to sample it. So then we have this joint distribution over both the sampling the function and over the obfuscate is randomness. And we want to say that with probability over this joint distribution, this whole thing can be simulated. So we're going to construct an explicit simulator which runs the adversaries algorithm on something that represents a 0 function. So what this says is that if you have this pattern and our priority you don't know what the pattern is, then this should behave to any adversarial algorithm A. This should behave just like something that is always 0 that never has an accepting input. So the proof of security of this is going to be in a generic group model. So the way this is set up is the following. So let's say, again, we're trying to evaluate a length and input. And each x0 through xn has two possible slots. So we'll start off by giving a table of two n handles. You can think of these handles as just being arbitrary strings in a space that's large enough that there's no collisions. And these handles will not have any meaning themselves except for interacting with the generic group oracle. So the group oracle itself is going to have some underlying group. It could be a cyclic group. It could be an integer ring of polynomials. And so the group oracle will initialize the random embedding from this group into the space of handles. And so the interaction is modeled as a following. You can give the group oracle two of these elements and it'll compute the product and its internal representation and give you a handle corresponding to that product. So if you've never seen this handle before, for example, if I took two of the table elements and computed something that was not in the table, then that new handle element should be uniformly distributed in this space age. So this is the model for the generic group. Now, the way we want to think about a proper computation of a function in this model is the following. We set up this table with all the possible bit values. So in order to evaluate an input x, we're going to choose the handles that are indicated by the input. So if x0 was 1, then we're going to choose h01. Do this for each input. You get n handles. And then we're going to do some computation over these n handles that will tell us the output value. So how do we do this computation? So this differs from a point function in sort of this following symmetry. Let's say the pattern is 0, 1 star. First two coordinates are just same as a point function. But on the third corner, we want these two handles to look the same when we compute the whole function. It shouldn't matter which one you choose. But on the other hand, they can't actually be identical before you complete the entire function evaluation, because then the adversary wouldn't be able to see that this is a wildcard slot. So the solution that we're going to use for this is the standard technique of polynomial interpolation. So it doesn't matter which samples you get as long as all of them are n unique samples, you can construct the same interpolating polynomial. So the setup is the following. We'll sample a polynomial such that p of 0 is 0. So you can sample this by just sampling the coefficients for the first to the nth terms and then constructing the polynomial as a sum like this. And then the way we're going to initialize that table of two n handles is as follows. So first let's say we have a, for the slots that are not supposed to be accepting, right? So for 0, 1 star, if x0 was 1, then we'd never want this to be part of an accepting input. So for that slot, we're going to give a completely random group element and then give the mapping from that to the handle space. So r here represents just an independently sampled random group element. For the slots that are part of an accepting input, we're going to give it a unique sample from the polynomial. And so the input of the polynomial is just going to be this index that you can compute beforehand just by looking at the table. So here's just 2i plus j. So we'll do this for both the non-Wallcard slots and for the Wallcard slots, right? These will all be generated in the same way. So then once you have this table, let them, we can follow our previous evaluation scheme, pick the samples, construct the interpolating polynomial, and then we'll just say, if p had the interpolating polynomial evaluates to 0 on the input 0, then we'll just output 1. So this corresponds to if all my samples were legitimate samples in the polynomial. As opposed to if I had a completely random sample, then p of 0 would not be 0. So this doesn't work, obviously, because so you can think of this as I had this table of 2n samples, but there's actually more than n samples, so you don't. So an adversary could try and figure out the extra samples that he's not supposed to do under an honest evaluation. So there's these decoding attacks or read Solomon codes with noisy samples. For example, the Berle-Cann-Wellsch algorithm, where in this case, if the number of Wallcard slots was greater than n over 2, you could construct an error polynomial and solve for that and figure out the distinction between the slots. So we can't release the scheme like that quite yet. But so one thing to note is that the Berle-Cann-Wellsch algorithm requires a nonlinear computation because you're actually multiplying this interpolating polynomial by other algebraic terms. However, as we'll show next, if you just want to compute the value of the interpolating polynomial on 0, this only requires a linear combination over the elements. So with this realization, we can just put everything in the exponent as follows. So we'll sample the same degree n polynomial in the same way, but then we'll also fix a cyclic group of the same prime order as the modulus of the integer ring. All right, so that's the setup, and then the way you give the handles will be the same as before we just put everything in the exponent of the same generator element, okay? So now that we have this, how do we do this linear combination computation to evaluate the polynomial interpolant? Well, you can think of polynomial interpolation as a linear combination of basis elements. And because our inputs are 2i plus j, and then we also only evaluate it on the term zero. We don't care about what the interpolating polynomial is and everything else. We can just plug in all these terms and get a single number out of them. We call this Lagrange coefficient. So then we're just computing a sum of Lagrange coefficients, which is just a product over the, which is just the sum in the exponent, which we can compute as a product of these generic group elements. So for correctness then, if each thing is a sample, then you'll see that in the exponent you get the sum of the ci Lagrange coefficient times the value of the polynomial. And so this is gonna give you g to the p of zero. And so if p of zero is the correct polynomial then, this will show you that the scheme gives you the correct output. But then if any of them was random, then you'll just get a product with a random group element. So the correctness of this scheme is pretty straightforward. Now we're gonna show security of this through the following game between the generic group simulators, right? So the proof of this will be a, so I'll go through the high-level proof of how we set up the generic group arguments. So we can think of this proof will be a hybrid over the actual internal group representation of each article, right? So the first one that we're gonna start with is the actual implementation. This will be the cyclic group of ordered p. So a group element will look like this. It'll actually be g to the sum p of some polynomial. The group that we're gonna end with is going to be this thing which represents the zero function. Now what is that? That's going to be a group over, that's gonna be a free group over two n basis elements, right? So the reason this represents a zero function is because each basis element here is going to correspond to one handle. So any linear combination of that is never gonna be zero because these are all independent elements with no relations. So then any adversary trying to construct an interpolation over this group will always get something non-zero. So this represents the zero function. So this is the simulator e for n. Now we'll have a third simulator in the middle which is sort of like an algebraic hybrid between these two. So for this last simulator, remember earlier we sampled the polynomial by sampling coefficients a1 through an. Here we're gonna leave those coefficients unsampled. So this will be a polynomial ring over the coefficients a1 through an. And then we'll also have variables for each non-accepting slot. So we had n accepting slots plus w wildcard slots. So there's n minus w non-accepting slots. Each of those gets its own variable b1. So the initial handle table will look like this. So p of three will be this algebraic polynomial of three a1 plus a9. And if you had a non-accepting slot then it would just be its own independent free variable b1. So this is what the three internal group representations will look like in our proof. Now how do we show indistinguishability between any two? And so for the rest of this, I'm just gonna focus on the indistinguishability game between s and m, right? The first two. And you can think of the game between the second step as roughly similar. So proofs in the generic group model in the past have been sort of difficult to formalize because there's a lot of things you need to keep track of. You need to keep track of handles, how these correspond to group elements. And you also need to formalize this notion of what does it mean for a generic two generic group to simulate is the different. In the past a lot of this has just been formalized as the simulation is perfect except if this happens. So we'd like to make that statement a bit more rigorous. So we're gonna define a security game as follows. So the adversary is given two oracles. One of them you know, it's the, let's hear what we'll say, it's the middle oracle with the z-adjoint a, b polynomial representation. The other oracle is going to be either s or m with probably half. And the goal of this game is to guess which one that is. So the adversary is going to start off with the table from each one and you're gonna, and each round he asks the same query to each oracle. And the adversary wins if he can guess correctly the identity of what the unknown oracle is. Okay, so how do we, okay, so what do we need to define this game, right? We had these two different group representations. One was a polynomial z-adjoint a, b. One was the actual group. So it turns out that in order to make this game work there's a relationship between these two, which is exactly the evaluation map. In which you take the polynomial and plug in the values that were actually sampled in the simulator's start. And so this gives you a group homomorphism from the group in the simulator m to the group in the simulator s. So we have this evaluation map, I'll denote it by. Now, I do need to establish some notation just to keep track of the rest of the bookkeeping. So let's say that we have these two handle sets, we had an adversary playing two oracles simultaneously. So I have two handle sets and so H superscript zero is just the initial table of the two end handles. And as each round, as the adversary asks a product and gets a new handle, he'll keep adding it to this set. And in order to make precise a notion of asking the same query, we'll have this other map that identifies between the two sets. So initially, this will correspond to just the same entry in one table maps the same entry on the table. And then if I ask a query and get this new pair of handles from each one, that will be added to this map. And then lastly, each group simulator will have its own embedding, this own sample fixed random embedding from the group into the space of handles. Okay, so the proof is going to be approved by induction. And so the idea is false. Let's say the adversary has made T queries so far and has these two sets of T handles. Okay, now first, I want to formalize what does it mean that the answers I've seen so far are the same. So that's going to be either I see one handle from each and I already knew that side of one map to side of another. So I've seen both handles and I know that one maps to another. Then that means this is the same answer. The other option is both are new handles. And so because each file is a random embedding, then these new handles will both be drawn from a uniform distribution over the handle space. So in this case, we'll also say that the query output from the two simulators are the same. So we want this to be true for a query. And if that's the case, then we can say this game is indistinguishable. But we also need another condition in order to show that this is true. And so this condition is that where we have this non-trivial kernel from the polynomial we're bringing Z join AB to the group. And because this kernel is non-trivial, there's multiple things that map down, but we want there to only be one that the adversary has seen so far in the handle space of M. So what this is saying is, let's say we get a handle in the handle space of S, there is a unique polynomial which corresponds to a handle you've seen in M which maps to this. Okay, so this will be inductive hypothesis. Now given these two things, let's look at what a round in this game looks like. A round of simulation, let's say we've done T rounds on the T plus one round, the adversary will want to ask a group query of say H1, H2 to simulator M, and then the same corresponding one to similar S which will be defined by the sign map. And he'll get back two handles, one from each, okay? So we have basically four cases here. These two handles can be the same that you've seen already. They can both be different or one can be different and one can be one that you've seen already. So one of these cases is impossible. Two of them are already, well still satisfied the inductive hypothesis and there's only one problem and we can show that there's only one problematic case which is that if you get a new handle in the simulator corresponding to the Z-adjoint AB polynomial ring, but you get one that you've already seen already corresponding to the simulator in the generic group. Right, so then basically this comes down to an algebraic argument. We can show that the only way this happens is if you get something in the kernel of this map and this evaluation map that's non-trivial. And so once you get to this step then the rest is a combinatorial calculation. So we can apply the same argument to both of the games. So right, so the evaluation map here I've defined is just for S to M but you can define a different evaluation map from M to E which evaluates on the random entry and on different random entries. So this is a high level overview of this framework that we give for arguing the generic group model and I will spare you all the combinatorics details. So to conclude, we give a obfuscation scheme for this function class and we're able to show it from a standard assumption just which is just a generic group model. And this assumption itself is easy to describe you're computing this rational number outside of the group and then your explanation using the group oracle. And so we also give this new framework for how you can maybe more formally think about generic group arguments using the simultaneous oracle game and how you can more explicitly identify when a simulation fails in this generic group case. And thanks for listening.