So what Zach and I are going to talk today is about the identity-based segmentation for a zero-test architecture. So naturally, so we have to give some leading information on what is zero-test architecture and going zero-test and then we dwell into what is the identity-based segmentation and then all the nuances of the politics, Zach will explain later. Do you want to introduce yourself actually to the... My name is Chandramoli. People call me as Moli for short. I work for National Institute of Standards and Technology. We have been working with... Moli is responsible for writing a lot of the SPs that you all need to go implement in practice. So his fault, but also awesome work. And I'm Zach. I'm one of the founding engineers at TouchRates and I work very closely with Moli to help author some of these. In particular, we've written a lot of the SP 800204 series together, which is the set of security recommendations for microservices and multicloud. However, we're actually going to be working together on some things around zero-trust very soon, and you'll get a nice sneak peek of that here in this presentation. So first of all, as Zach mentioned in the keynote address, zero-trust has been around for quite some time. But then he says, hadn't focus on zero-trust right now, is of course we know all the good reasons that no longer there is something called a perimeter exist because people are sitting all over the place. And secondly, the applications themselves have become quite distributed. So naturally, east-west traffic is now a bigger part of the traffic rather than north-south traffic. And secondly, all applications are in the form of microservices. There are many pieces involved. And so naturally, each of the access decisions should be based upon per request. And you take into account all the context, there will be variables because there are very many variables involved. And it should be, of course, conformed to the good old cardinal principles of least privilege and so on and so forth. And naturally, it should be, so naturally means it should be identity-based. So and core all the entities carrying identity, you know, the users and services and devices. So that's what we are going to focus on today about the identity-based segmentation. And again, the high-level framing is, you know, assume the attackers in the network. What do we do to mitigate the damage that they can do by binding their attack in space and in time? Yep. So then, so we have now actually shown the need for why you focus on zero trust now and identity-based segmentation. So in other words, why do we call it as identity-based segmentation? Because originally our controls were based upon the assumption of a perimeter. And now that we venture into the zero trust, the initial thinking was, can we do a segmentation of the network itself? So but the existing techniques on network segmentation, like, you know, based upon subnets, as well as some labels as we case, the case of VLANs are no longer sufficient. Because all the virtualized containers, workloads, they move all over the place. You can't pin them to a particular, even a network address or a subnet and so on. So that's why we need an identity-based architecture. So in the zero trust architecture, essentially what we really described is all the very components that are involved and all the data flows that are involved. And last but not the least, the all the policies that we require and then the security of the enforcement points. So those are some of the things that we want to concentrate as far as the zero trust architecture is concerned. And then this zero set architecture is the fundamentally it is based upon the identity-based segmentation. So another name for zero trust segmentation also. And then, of course, as we all know, identity-based means what the name implies. You know, it is not based upon any network parameters and it applies to services, users, and devices. And also it should be not just any identity, arbitrarily like user ID and so on. It should be a cryptographically verifiable identity. That's the most important thing as far as the services concerned. Yeah, and a couple of things here to note is that and in that second bullet point is doing a lot of heavy lifting there, right? So we need not just a service and a user identity, but we also want to know where the device that it's originating from. And we may even use things like the network parameters as part of a risk-based assessment to give you permission or scope or things like that, but it cannot be the only check that you're doing because that is not sufficient. We need the identity checks and we can continue to apply traditional checks like network location as part of a layered defense. And we'll talk about that layering very soon here. So actually then as far as the zero trust is concerned, the comprehensive solutions we know consist of not only runtime checks, but also the whole processes in place, and also the monitoring and continuous reformulations of policies and so on. So that is the whole sub-process. But in this presentation, we are just focusing on the identity-based segmentation aspects alone. Yeah, so really just the runtime controls, which to be honest, are the easy part. The people process things are going to be the hard part to change within the organization. But the runtime controls, we can help solve with technology, right? And it can become a lot simpler. So it is a runtime technology solution that we are focusing on this. And then we identified, at least in the concept of microservices environment service mesh, that we do need at the minimum these five things. First, the session itself should be secure for that we need encryption and transit. And then of course, we do need to validate service identities. And then once identity is validated, we need some means of authorizing authorization at the service level. And then of course, the end user is also an integral part of the whole picture. We need to have an authentication of the end user. And then lastly, the end user authorization as well. End user authorization, especially if you want resource level controls, you need to have end user authorization as well. Exactly. And then this is our goal of realizing the ZTA through this trial technology approaches. Yeah, and just to kind of paint a picture here, you can imagine moving up the tiers. We go from subnet-based connectivity and micro segmentation at that level. We can start to layer in identity-based controls, but policy gets really powerful and very compelling when I can combine both service runtime policy and user access policy together. So you can write a policy that says, for example, not just the front end can call the back end, but the front end can call a particular method on the back end only in the presence of valid end user credential that has the permission to read, for example. And so again, the game is all about bounding an attack in space and in time. Those more comprehensive policies that combine both physical location and application as well as end user credential do a lot to help us write very tight policy that bounds an attacker in space what they can pivot to attack very tightly. Yeah. So just a background to that, we want to have some overall view of service mesh. We know that we are somewhat preaching to the co-head. Everyone will be familiar with the service mesh. But just to give you an idea that the service mesh really is meant to accomplish three primary things. So one, it has the infrastructure as an infrastructure layer. It provides identity to the applications, which is the very key. And then the second one is it does all the things with the traffic routing starting from service discovery, intelligent routing, and all the nice and goody resilient measures like the number of read, rise, blue, green deployments and all that stuff. And then the third one is, of course, the most important is to enforce service to service authorization as well as end user to source authorization. So that's where all of us focus on policies and everything comes into the picture. So and not only because this beautiful entity called the proxy that is part of the data plane of the service mesh, that actually really acts as a security kernel because it is non-bipassable and also it's verifiable. It is outside the application code. And then so then actually we just give a brief description of how these various things are accomplished in this one. So as also most of you may be familiar, the encryption we ensures through the mutual TLS and shake usually using the service identity which contains the service identities, the subject alternate name field of the service, the short-lived service. Yeah, basically we can leverage Spiffy certs to do both encryption and transit as well as our authenticateable runtime service identity. So we use the same certificate for service identity and authentication as well. And then for service to service authorization we actually got a lot of 15 options using that. It can be an in-process filters in the proxy itself. You can use proxy extensions or you can call external services if you want more sophisticated authentication like the NGAC that NIST has developed and so on. And similar then we come to the end user identity authentication. There as we have said in one of our publications that we can land up with, you can use any of your native identity providers to give you the end user authentication, the end user credentials. And then at the ingress point in the gate and the ingress gateway, you can exchange it for a job token which contains you'll give the local identity and so on. And it can also populate it with claims. And then the same in the end user when they are inside the mesh and making a call. So those the claims in the job token can be used and compared against the resources that are being requested that particular resource. Or again here we have the option that if you want to detail the resource level authorizations, you go to an external service like NGAC and so on for the end user to resource authentication. And you know specifically in SB 800204B which Muly and I wrote, we talk about extra and so if you want to dig into some of these ideas in more detail, go check that out. We talk about pulling out things like authentication into this common layer into the service mesh so that it can be audited so that we can have higher assurance in the code because it's not delegated across every application. There's a lot of really strong properties from a security perspective that we can get pushing this out into a common layer. As long as the application still ensures that those checks have been applied when it gets it. Things like looking at a job that the system mints, validating that job that it came from a trusted source and then using those claims to actually apply authorization is one way that an application can attest that these checks have happened before the request reaches it. Essentially we have detailed the function of how JOT token is being processed to arrive at. And not just JOTs, it doesn't have to be. And one thing I'll just point out is there are actually multiple high assurance deployments hitting things like FedRAMP moderates in high controls, leveraging things like the service mesh to offload user authentication and authorization to a common infrared layer, to the mesh. This is not just something that we can do, but this is something that actually is done in the wild in high-criticality environments that are security-first. So far we have outlined all the goodies that a service mesh can do, but then this may be at a particular service mesh instance for a particular cluster and so on. So how do you take it to the enterprise level? And that's where we need another infrastructure layer that's sitting on top of the individual service meshes so that you can apply uniform policies throughout the enterprise for all the service meshes and so on. And secondly, that is really a reality because not only there are multiple clusters within the organization, but the common scenario is that you do have hybrid environments, you do have some resources in-house in the data centers and branch offices and some in clouds, and some in even multiple clouds. So when that is the scenario there, we definitely need a higher level infrastructure layer to in fact act as the super control plane for the individual control planes in the service mesh instances. Exactly. And that lets us do things like enforce consistent identity for services across the different sites. That lets us do things like author a single policy, hey, the front-end can call the back-end and manifest that policy across the infrastructure, right? And we can take care to ensure that we have the right application in the identities everywhere, even when we're doing things like going across clusters or across clouds. So that same policy that you write front-end can call back-end is going to apply equally, regardless of whether they live next to each other on the same, you know, it's pods on the same host or they happen to be traversing a DMZ and going through a firewall to reach back to the data center. So yeah, that's why, so we do need definitely everyone is convinced about the map to have policies, but then these policies alone cannot be sufficient. So that is why we need policies at the multiple tiers. Why? Because the network level policies are needed because some of the compliance regulations and even regulators, they are not satisfied with anything else because service identity is something not everybody can get their hands on and things like that. And secondly, it does serve its purpose in the sense that the network level policies itself can be at two tiers. One is very coarse grained between firewall to firewall, but it can also be somewhat subnet based in the sense of from a gateway to gateway and so on. And then, of course, on top of it, as Zach said, we can layer all the good service identity based public policies on top of these network policies. And so the beauty of this is we can, these policies can really coexist. They don't have to conflict with each other. So the multi-tier policy is the most desirable thing. And as just now described, can be network tier policies, which is can be both coarse grained and fine grained and then identity tier policies, which are more really dynamic. So that's why, so the tier policies can be really static. So you don't have to really, in some sense, it allows for relaxation of those policies in favor of higher level policies. Exactly. Keep changing environment and so on and so forth. And really, this is before, before we hop on, you know, this is really all about kind, trying to pave a path for organizations and the auditors who checked the organization's compliance to understand the move from a perimeter model into an identity based model. And so we view these multi-tiered policies. One is a stepping stone to facilitate that. But two, exactly like Muly said, is to help with defense in depth, more layers for an attacker to have to traverse, you know, more ways to bound the attack in both space and in time. Right. And then this is just a schematic diagram that's just showing at, between what entities the network policies apply and then where application layer is. Exactly. And so just to help kind of make some of these ideas concrete and help kind of paint the picture for how they might help you bridge a traditional perimeter model, I want to, you know, walk through some cases. So, you know, suppose we have these two services communicating, and suppose one, you know, they're at either different sites or maybe one is in cloud, one is in the data center, right? And so we have a traditional, you know, DMZ and a whole class of policy that we want to apply to that traffic as it's coming into kind of our trusted data center. Oftentimes, that requires rule changes per app, right? And that is where we get the pain in managing outbound firewalls. This is where we get the pain in managing the network-oriented rules, right? You look at a set of subnets that are allowed to egress to a set of IP addresses and like, what does it mean, right? And this is where we have a spreadsheet where we record it somewhere, right? That is clearly brittle and painful and we see it regularly create, you know, slowdowns and organizations, right? So one of the ideas that we put forward is using basically identity-aware gateways to help us bridge that perimeter. So the idea is that we can have, you know, gateways on both sides of the perimeter. We can establish relatively static policies to facilitate those gateways communicating, and we don't need to change those policies per app because those gateways are static deployments on our site. Then we can leverage identity-based policy, which is, which can be much more dynamic and hopefully easier to maintain, about who can go over that connection, who can go over that transit. So in other words, as Jack explained, these gateways offer somewhat of a bridge to go from identity-based policies to the network-based policies in the sense that they are participating in both. Exactly. So in that sense, they are able to go over policies and now Jack will explain in detail, these are three levels of policies, Yeah, exactly. And so we see these exactly overlay on top of each other, right? And so we have exactly like Millie said, core-screen firewall policy at the bottom. Obviously, these are not like, you know, real real policies, but a shorthand if you didn't kind of get the idea, right? We have firewall-to-firewall policy. We need microsegmentation as well on each half. Very hard to manage how they go over that, by the way, with things like a CNI, it becomes challenging. It's not easy to bridge across the two halves of our policy. The service mesh can sit on top of that and facilitate consistent policy across our different deployments, right? So we know, you know, lower-level policy is going to live at the site, right? The microsegmentation is bound to a cluster usually, right, or a set of VPCs. And we typically don't, you know, we're going to open up firewall rules between the two. We typically don't see microsegmentation across these. That's, again, where we can start to layer. We can start to relax some of those policies that can be hard to maintain and replace them or augment them with mesh-level, identity-level policies that can be consistent across the entire infrastructure. And when I say consistent across the entire infrastructure, what I mean is like literally we can instantiate the same policy document in every mesh without having to specialize it or change it for each deployment and have it be correctly enforced because identities flow in the end. So as we're looking at how we realize this enterprise ETA, you know, the first step is we want to start to implement this identity-based segmentation, right? We want to start to migrate towards identity-based policy and we can leverage some of these patterns to help make our lives easier dealing with things like the traditional perimeter. You know, as we said, you know, we need some, you will likely want some central coordination infrastructure that sits above a service mesh to help manage some of these, right? So if we look at a traditional, you know, corporate topology of three zones, this is pretty standard stuff that we see all the time, we can start to insert these identity-aware policy enforcement points, these gateways, fundamentally an envoy proxy in the data path there to start to leverage higher-level policy at all of these locations. So in other words, what we call as a proxies in the context of service mesh, they play the role of the ingress proxy as well as the egress proxy and then also as what is known as the transit process itself, you know, in terms of they can even perform other goodies like load distributions and identifying the ingress proxy for the various clusters and so on. Yeah, exactly, because there's a certain amount of like service discovery information you'll need to propagate across clusters, right? For example, you know, your ingress edge may want to load balance across multiple clusters behind it in the same VPC or in the same data center. So there's some service discovery that you need to wire up, there's policy that we want to push to these layers as well, you know, and so we can start to leverage things like your CD pipeline as one of the ways to implement this coordination infrastructure, right? You can, for example, templatize a lot of the things like service exposure and service consumption and let your CD pipeline instantiate the policies across the various meshes. Certainly there are online ways to do that as well. The advantage of implementing all these through the processes, you know, you can have a level of security assurance because of all this. Yeah, and fundamentally again, you know, we see this as layering on top of each other. So again, this is a, you know, kind of a rough picture, but you know, we still anticipate these traditional perimeter based controls. We're going to have, you know, segmentation or micro segmentation underneath that inside of that perimeter, right? You typically see and I will sit even on top of that as another layer and we want the mesh to fit exactly on top of all those, right? And again, the advantage here is that we can start to relax some of these lower level policies that are hard to maintain in favor of policies allowing these gateways to communicate and back that with identity based policy to instead. Yeah, so again, you know, why do we do this? The main motivation for, you know, in general identity based segmentation, hopefully people get why we would want to do this in the context of moving towards the ZTA. Why might we want to manage multiple tiers of policy at the same time while we're doing that? You know, again, it's really all about appeasing your current regulatory requirements, your current control requirements and the knowledge of your current security team and the auditors, regulators you have to deal with, right? They may not be in some places, you know, they're very forward. For example, the Air Force is a very forward organization where I can, I don't need a perimeter and I don't need to show a bunch of these controls to get approval to get an ATO. Other parts are not the same, right? And so we want that defense in depth to be able to prove both the original perimeter based controls and that we can do better and that we can facilitate the organization moving faster because we're not having to manage brittle policy at a lower layer. And further, most of the time, the reluctance and acceptance and accepting the policies is due to the complexity and that way, in the tail case of identity based policies, we are able to express in terms of entities that people can understand. Exactly. This application and this process can talk to this application and this process. Exactly. So that's one of the other advantages. Yeah, policy becomes a lot more, yeah, policy is more maintainable because it's more readable and it's in terms that are closer to what a developer thinks about service names and service identities, not like what's subnet of my own. And again, these can continue to exist and we expect them to. We'll end and take questions for whatever time we have left, but just to give you a teaser here, SB 800 207A will be coming out in this calendar year in 2023 around these ideas, this idea of starting to use identity based policy enforcement points to help span traditional perimeter based controls. And with that, I think we have hopefully a little bit of time left for some questions. I think maybe about five or seven minutes. So please, any questions for either of us, for both of us? Yeah, exactly. Yeah. And so we, and you know, for example, in GAC, next generation access control is an access control standard that NIST is working on that's an ABAC kind of similar conceptually to what Zanzibar is used to implement. And so yeah, exactly. You know, we can implement, you know, all of these orange pieces are policy enforcement points and we can choose whether we integrate with an external system to apply, you know, potentially very rich policy because we have like a full ABAC like a Zanzibar kind of a system. But we can also apply much simpler policies that are like already built into Envoy, right? For example, you know, just simple services service access with our back, right? And so that's a spectrum there. So yeah, the mesh is bringing enforcement and what you choose to use as your decision system, you know, as long as it integrates with the mesh, it's all good, right? And we typically see, for example, OPA used with Envoy actually enforcing the policy, but OPA acting as the decision point, right, is a very common deployment. And all that is possible because of these capabilities of proxy one, it can do the enforcement doing, using an in-process program, like a Jot filter, which compares simply the resources against the claims and so on. Or you can use external APIs or, you know, you can call the regular authorization service with external. So all this, because of the extensible API, the proxies, all these goodies are possible. That's the goal to get to. You can certainly start by delegating to Active Directory because that encodes your current policy, right? And so we don't, you know, I don't want to paint this as a picture of like, do this perfectly. The whole goal is to give us stepping stones to get to kind of that ideal world where we're doing very rich end user-based application context, aware policy on every hop. That's the goal to get to. If the policy is in Active Directory today and we can use that to do user authorization, then that's the perfect place to start with one of the integrations and then go from there into a richer policy engine where you need it. So in other words, it offers a very great path rather than one day turning out the light and so on and so forth. Exactly. Do we have another question here? Yeah, so it can be any number of things. Yeah, it can be, you know, they're, yeah, typically it's going to be like a CD system that's coordinating. There's also a variety of like vendor products that do online policy pushing and like multi-cluster management and stuff like that as well.  The, you know, in my opinion, the important thing is to get the right abstractions for your application developers and fit them into your workflow, their workflow in a, in the right way. And then it shouldn't really matter if it's the CD system that does it or some other engine because they should be interacting with it in a way that's abstracted and controlled by the platform team. That's why we want to call it as a super controlled plane that sits on top of the individual service instance control plane. Yeah. And it doesn't necessarily, so control plane applies runtime. It doesn't necessarily have to be a runtime system. It can be a system like a CD system that's pushing it, but it can also be a runtime online system that's acting as a control plane, getting data and pushing it around. Both of those are good ways. It depends on what you need out of the system and what are the properties and what's the operational investment you want to make for what is right. Right, Arjun? Yes. Yes. 100%. It could potentially, right? So like, yeah, you know, it doesn't really matter how we encode that identity as long as we all agree on what the identities mean, and we have some mechanism at runtime to authenticate it, right? So at a service, you know, at a service-to-service layer, of course, we want to leverage Spiffy because that's a good standard. But, you know, at the end user layer, it could be, you know, whatever you want, right? It doesn't really matter. And then, you know, the SP, for example, won't be strongly opinionated on that. Yeah, that's why you said you can have either a custom authentication or one of the OIDC providers, OpenID Connect. Yeah, because we very frequently see, you know, yeah, somebody do OIDC. Yeah, OIDC or OAuth, and they're just holding tokens, right? And so it might as well just be an opaque thing. Exactly, right? So there's plenty of room to do exactly. Exactly. And to be clear, you know, encryption and transit, we just to tee off that a little bit, why do we say encryption and transit is required? It's not because encryption transit is good. It's because we want message authenticity and we want eavesdropping protection, right? And so we can achieve the message authenticity is the really important one, right? You may or may not care about eavesdroppers being able to see what the requests are, but you certainly want to know that it hasn't been tampered with, because otherwise all these other checks are meaningless, right? Who cares what the identity is if somebody stuffed the envelope with something different, right? And so really has to start there with the assurance of the data on the wire, and then we can use that to kick off policy down. Any other questions? Yeah. Yeah, exactly. So the question is roughly just a paraphrase, have auditors actually approved this? Can I actually do this pattern? Is that roughly it? Yeah. And the answer is yes. Across the board, we've seen a bunch of different auditors under different regulatory regimes approve these style things, whether that's folks like the Air Force AOs who have approved ATO for a lot of, you know, federal moderate to high systems on this kind of thing. We also see it in folks that are subject to PCI, right? And for years, actually we've seen folks implement a variety of PCI controls using this kind of stuff, right? So this is something that we're seeing, and that's why we're moving to start to write this as a standard, right? Not because it's brand new and like we think it's cool idea, but we've seen this implemented. We're seeing regulators start to accept it. And so our goal in codifying it as an SP is to really push that to those regulators, to those approvers, to say this is a good thing. You should accept this as a first step for educating them to move the ball, to get to the end, to say that we all want, which is like identity-based policy. So in other words, the lessons learned there into the implementation that Zach talked about as really is going to be a good input into this document that we are. Yeah. Was there a follow-up there? Yeah. Yeah. So we're starting to build those out. So for example, there is an Istio to NIST SB 853 mapping, for example, and that's actually in the form of an OSCal manifest that can be used to feed that in and check the assurance of the system at runtime, right? So it's early days for that, but those are things that are being developed there. And the goal is to push a lot of this into open source, right? So things like OSCal, the open source compliance assessment language, lets us do programmatic checks. A computer can verify that you're implementing controls, not a human auditor who's quinting at it and checks the box, right? That moves us to a world where we can do it continuously. My goal is that we can get basically all the big infrastructure projects that we're depending on to produce and maintain OSCal definitions of their components. That's one of my longer-term goals to try and implement. Yeah. Yeah. So the important part here is not how the policy enforcement is implemented, right? So I mentioned Envoy a few times here, but all the concepts that we're talking about are independent of the data plane implementation, right? So as long as you're doing those five checks, I don't care. You shouldn't care. Nobody really needs to care if it's EVPF or if it's Envoy or if it's a VPN. That part is not very important, right? There will be security in runtime and operational tradeoffs to different implementations, and we are starting to do some write-ups, kind of starting to analyze that, right? I fully expect a lot of this policy to move into EVPF as an accelerator, right? Anything that we can move out of user space and into the kernel to be able to reject a request earlier without having to do those context switches is going to pay a lot of dividends for, you know, higher throughput and higher performance systems, right? And so in that sense, I expect that EVPF will be widely used as an accelerator for data plane policy application, right? In other words, providing coverage for the various events is what is important to us rather than what will help us identify the events in terms of the kernel triggers and things. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. All righty. Do we have time for more? How are we doing on time? Nobody's come with a crook to get me off the stage yet, so we can keep doing questions until that happens. Any other questions from folks? Yeah. Yes, they will be available. The conference should make them available. If not, I think we have our contact info here. Just shoot an email worst case if they don't pop up in a week. Already awesome. Well, hey, y'all have been an awesome audience. I really appreciate the good questions. Thank you. Thanks for your time.


Despite the fact that it's already surprising I see so just keep song doing better and better every time Hey guys, so this is my review for the accountant the new Ben Affleck film that was directed by Gavin O'Connor and First off I want to say that I actually like Gavin O'Connor's movies I followed him for a little while now Bride and Glory is a pretty decent film and then he also did warrior which was absolutely phenomenal So when I heard that he was doing a movie with Ben Affleck about being a savant mathematician who could both kill people really well as Well as cook the books or uncook the books for criminal organizations. That's just sounds so Interesting and that's this whole movie in a nutshell as it's interesting. It's engaging It is one of my favorite movies of the year so far because it's just it's original Original finally an original idea from Hollywood and so good the whole basis of Ben Affleck's character is that he's a savant child who learned to adapt to what he has and he's put it towards being an accountant and basically helping people ever in his own way as well as Cooking the books for criminal organizations. He also knows how to shoot. He knows how to fight He knows how to do all these things. He's basically a lethal emotionless weapon and His acting in this movie is probably the best part by far. The story is really good But Ben Affleck really becomes this character and he we see him go through these motions And it's just every moment we see him as a savant learning how to But basically get around the ideas of what a savant has to deal with was Incredible the amount of research and the amount of sort of around ideas like happened in this film are just so good You'll be wanting to see what he does next not just with what he does to progress a story But just how his character reacts with the world and this is something I also liked about this movie is this is what a person with an Osberg with osburgers acts like not that stupid crap that Sheldon does in a big bang theory if you knew a person like Sheldon in real life He wouldn't be funny. You think he's an asshole the second part is this story the script is absolutely impeccable There are so many layers to the story And there's so much that is told in a very brief period of time that you keep on thinking wow There's just another layer on top of it, and it's a very engaging story There's so many parts to it and there's a lot of twist and turns that happened in this film that actually caught Me off by surprise and I was really happy with it I was fully engaged I was into the film the entire way and there's also some humor here and there too Which is something I didn't expect from this film the action scenes are also very well done The some of them are not shot the greatest admittedly the shaky cams not the yeah, not too good But the gunfights are in nuts and brutal a lot it reminded me a lot of John Wick John Barenthal is also in this movie. He's amazing. I'm loving that this guy's getting work and just the last 10 minutes You're gonna need to jaw-drop because it's so Amazing aside from the shaky cam There are a few moments in the film that it doesn't hold your hand with what he's doing So you're kind of just like It's like watching Wall Street all over stones Wall Street because that movie doesn't hold your hand at all The stock market this film doesn't really hold your hand at all through the accounting business So you're gonna be a little bit left off in that some of the editing choices of where places are in the story are a little bit Incoherent with how the main flow is but that happens very rarely and otherwise the film is fantastic Gavin O'Connor once again shows that he's a very Experienced really good director and he can bring something it's original the script for the show and for this film Is amazing Ben Affleck again is absolutely great This film takes a turn from things that you would normally see in films and again That's another thing that I like about it Anna Kendrick's actually good in it, too And what's funny is that this is a second movie that she kind of has a relationship with a killer Hired killer because there was mr. Right. I think that's what she did with Sam Rockwell. That was a really good movie, too Anyway, guys, that's all for me. I hope you enjoyed this review. I very much enjoyed watching This film I'm gonna give it a six out of seven. It's really good It's one of my top ten films of the year for sure Ben Affleck once again proving himself to be a stellar actor And I cannot wait for live by night later on in the beginning of next year anyway guys That's all for me. See you guys next time


This paper proposes using deep learning-based classification and detection algorithms to detect vehicles in intelligent transportation systems. It uses transfer learning to improve the accuracy of existing models by fine-tuning them with datasets containing images and videos of traffic patterns. The paper finds that this approach outperforms traditional methods in terms of accuracy and execution speed. This article was authored by Anam Farid, Farhan Hussain, Kuram Khan and others.


CHAPTER XIII. THE UNITED STATES IN THE WAR The first of the Navy sent to Europe. One of the first things done after our entrance into the war was to send a considerable part of our Navy to Europe, not only battleships to augment the fleet that was holding the German Navy in check, but also a number of swift torpedo boats and destroyers to aid in reducing the menace from submarines. Huge appropriations were made by Congress for the purpose of increasing the number of lighter craft in the Navy. Particularly, efficient submarine chasers were developed, called eagles, which, by being made all alike, could be quickly produced in great numbers. RAISING THE ARMY Great numbers of young men at once enlisted in various branches of the service. Profiting, however, by the experience of Great Britain, the government determined on conscription as a more democratic method of raising an army. A draft law was passed, providing for the enrollment of all men between the ages of 21 and 31. These were examined and classified, and from time to time large groups were sent to camps to be trained. Each of these camps can take care of approximately 50,000 soldiers. Under a later draft law passed in 1918, the age limits for enrolling men were extended to include those from 18 to 45. OFFICERS' TRAINING CAMPS In order to provide officers for such an emergency as now confronted the nation, training camps for officers had been established the previous year at several places in the country. These officers were now called upon to aid the regular army officers in training the recruits. The officers' training camps had been continued and increased in number in order that a regular supply of properly trained officers may be available for the constantly increasing army. SUPPLIES AND MUNITIONS The industries of the country were compelled to turn their attention to the making of supplies and munitions for our fighters. The great plants that had been making powder, guns, shells, and other immunitions for the Allies started to make these things for the United States. This was easy to arrange since England and France had about reached a position where they were able to supply themselves. Besides, great quantities of food and clothing were also needed, and the meat packers and manufacturers of textiles, shoes, and other articles turned their plants to the production of supplies for the army. AIRCRAFT The war in Europe had shown the high usefulness of aircraft as part of the military forces. Recognizing this, Congress appropriated two-thirds of a billion dollars for the purpose of constructing thousands of airplanes and for training thousands of pilots and other experts to use them. Unfortunately, much time was lost in building manufacturing plants and in experimenting with various types of engines and other parts of airplanes. Only a small part of the 20,000 it had been planned to send to France by June 1918 were completed at that time. Meanwhile, however, engineers had developed, on the basis of the automobile engine, an improved engine known as the Liberty Motor, and the production of efficient airplanes was at last going ahead rapidly. FOOD AND FUEL CONTROL So large a proportion of the population of the European countries is employed in carrying on the war that there has been a constant decrease in the amount of food produced in Europe. Fortunately, up to 1917, this country had enough for itself and sufficient to spare for the Allies and the neutral nations. In 1917, there was an unusually short cereal crop all over the world. The result was that there was not enough food to go around if everyone in this country ate as much as usual. In order that proper conservation of food might be brought about, a food commission was created, not only to prevent profiteering, but also to direct how the people should economize in order to help win the war. Shortages in various kinds of foods were controlled at first through voluntary rationing under requests made by the food administrator. Later on, limits were placed on the amount of wheat, flour, and sugar that could be bought by large dealers and bakeries. A certain proportion of other cereals had to be purchased with each purchase of wheat. Bakers were required to make their bread with a proportion of other flowers mixed with the wheat. These regulations were enforced by such punishments as fines, the closing of stores or bakeries, or by depriving the offender of his supply for a given length of time. Kitchens were established in large communities where housewives could learn the best ways of making bread with the use of various substitutes for wheat. Early in the fall of 1917, it was seen that, because of inadequate transportation facilities and of a tremendously increasing demand for coal by the war industries, there would be a shortage of fuel during the winter. Accordingly, a fuel administrator was appointed who regulated the distribution of fuel. Industries essential to the war were supplied, while those that were not doing needful work had their supply reduced or cut off altogether. As it happened, the winter of 1917-1918 was exceedingly severe. Freight congestion became worse and worse, and the shortage in the industrial centers was even greater than had been anticipated. The control of fuel saved the people of the northeastern section of our country very much distress and assured a supply of fuel for war purposes. Later in 1918, householders and mercantile establishments were allowed only a portion of their usual coal supply. The number of stops made by street railway cars was reduced, and window and other display lighting was forbidden on all but two nights in the week. An act of Congress directed that from the last Sunday in March to the last Sunday in October, all clocks must be set one hour ahead of time. This regulation brings more of our activities into the daylight hours and so cuts down the use of artificial light. By these methods much coal was conserved for the use of factories engaged in war work. Transportation control. Soon after war was declared, the railroads of the country put themselves at the disposal of the government in order to take care of the increase in transportation service required by the state of war. The nearly 700 railroads of the country were organized and run as a single system under the direction of a railroad's war board, composed of some of the chief railroad officials. Passenger train service was reduced, chiefly in order to provide for the transportation of several million soldiers to and from training camps. Freight cars and locomotives from one railroad were kept as long as they were needed in the service of another. The roads no longer competed with each other for freight, but goods were sent over the road that had, at the time of shipment, the most room for additional traffic. At the end of 1917, as a measure of economy and to secure even greater unity of organization, the government took over the control of the railroads for the period of the war. As the director general of railroads, the president appointed William G. Mikado, who was also the secretary of the treasury. Half a year later, the government likewise took over for the duration of the war the operation of telegraph and telephone lines, which were placed under the control of the postmaster general. Shipbuilding. Less than two weeks after the declaration of war, the United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corporation was organized with a capital of $50 million all owned by the government. The shipping board had been formed some time before to increase the merchant shipping of the country. When war came, more and yet more ships were needed, not only to take our armies and their food and fighting material to Europe, but also to replace the shipping destroyed by submarines. In order that these ships might be built as speedily as possible, it was desirable that the government should direct the work. Existing shipyards were taken over and new shipyards were built by the government. In the building of ships, the original program was more than doubled, and the United States became the greatest shipbuilding nation of the world. This was made possible largely through the construction of what are known as fabricated ships. That is, many ships built exactly alike from parts made in quantities. Patterns are made for each special piece of steel and sent to steel plants in different parts of the country. There, dozens of pieces are made exactly like the pattern. All the pieces for a ship are sent to the shipyard ready to be riveted in their proper places. Thus the shipyard can work much faster than if the pieces were prepared at the yard. German Shipping Seized Immediately upon the declaration of war, the President ordered the seizure of 99 German merchant ships, which were in our ports. Most of them had been in harbor since August 1914. They had been free to sail if they wished, but preferred not to risk capture by British or French warships. When the United States officials took charge of these vessels, it was found that important parts of their machinery had been destroyed or broken under orders from Germany. Repairs were quickly and skillfully made, the German names of the ships were changed, and a few months later over 600,000 tons of German built ships were taking American troops and supplies across the seas. Pain for the War Wars nowadays cost enormous sums of money on account of the highly technical material that is used as well as the great size of the armies. There are two ways by which the money can be raised. The government can borrow money and it can raise money by taxation. It was found wise to pay for the war by depending on both of these methods. In May and June, our people were called upon to subscribe to an issue of $2 billion worth of Liberty Bonds. Half as much more was offered to the government. A second loan for $3 billion in November was again oversubscribed by 50%. In 1918, the third loan for $3 billion and the fourth loan for $6 billion were also oversubscribed. Up to November 1918, the government asked for $14 billion, the people offered to lend about $18 billion, and the government accepted about $16 billion. In addition to the above, the Treasury Department authorized the sale of $2 billion worth of war-saving stamps during the year 1918. These stamps represent short-term loans to the government, which are so small that practically every person is able to invest in them. It was deemed important also that the people should pay a large percentage of the war bill through taxes. Congress therefore passed a tax bill which not only increased the income taxes to be paid by individuals and companies, but also placed heavy taxes on many things which were more or less in the nature of luxuries, or at least were not essential to life. Railroad tickets, admission tickets to amusements of all sorts, telephone and telegraph messages, and hundreds of other things above a certain low minimum cost were taxed. In this way, the government raised $6 billion or $7 billion in a single year, approximately one-third of the current cost of the war. Loans to the Allies. Our government has from time to time advanced much money to the other nations who are fighting Germany. Practically all of these loans are in the form of credits with which the Allies pay for materials bought in the United States, little if any of the money so loaned goes out of the country. Red Cross and Other Organizations The American Red Cross Society, formed for the relief of suffering through war or other disaster, was made ready for extensive work by the subscription of $150 million in June 1917 by the people of the country. The work was organized on a national basis and in every community there was formed a Red Cross chapter to make garments, sweaters, or woolen head coverings to keep the soldiers warm, to roll bandages, to open canteens or refreshment stations for soldiers while traveling or in camp, to train nurses to care for the sick and wounded, and to do other work of a similar sort. Other organizations such as the Young Men's Christian Association and the Knights of Columbus took upon themselves the task of entertaining and making comfortable our soldiers and sailors, providing places where they may read, write letters, play games, and otherwise relieve their minds from the terrible strain of war. If our Army and Navy that are fighting for us in Europe represent the strength of our country, we can also say that the work of the Red Cross and these other organizations represents the heart of our country. The Work of Schools in the War School pupils are the largest and best organized group of the population of the country. It was natural, therefore, for the government to turn to the school children when it wanted a national response. Boys and girls having the lessons of the war impressed upon them in school carry the message home. Often in no other way can the parents be reached. There are many ways in which the school children give direct and valuable help to the nation. It is not possible to do more than merely hint at some of these. The importance of saving and thrift was early impressed on the children, not only through the thrift stamp and liberty loan campaigns, but also through direct lessons on conserving food, clothing, and public and private property. Many children planted and took care of war gardens, adding a total of many million dollars' worth of food to the nation's supply. In connection with the gardens, a canning campaign was conducted, which aimed at the conservation of perishable food that could not be consumed at once. The schools rendered valuable service in doing red cross work. Both boys and girls knit garments and comforts for our soldiers, and the girls make garments for the little children of France and Belgium who had been driven from their homes by the war. Rise and Prices When a country is at war, the government must have what it needs, quickly and at any price. The price situation is made worse if, for any reason, there happens to be a scarcity of a given article. When the government wants a great quantity of ammunition for which it is willing to pay a high price, the manufacturer, desiring to obtain an increased number of workmen quickly, offers unusually high pay. This attracts workmen from other industries, and the latter offers still higher pay to retain their workmen. In this way, wages rapidly go up, and things that have to be produced with labor, like coal or houses or ships, rise enormously in cost. The farmer, too, has to pay more for his help. In order to induce the farmers to plant more wheat, the government fixed a high price for it. This helped to make flour expensive. Many fishermen went into the Navy or into factories where they could get high wages. If they kept on fishing, they thought they ought to make as much money as the men who had given up fishing and gone to make guns and build ships. Perhaps the biggest reason for high prices is the actual scarcity of many things. Many of the men who do the work of producing are at war. They are using food and clothing much faster than if they were not soldiers. A soldier needs about twice as much food and wears out eight times as many pairs of shoes as he did when he was at home. From these facts it is easy to see why prices are high during the war. Our achievements in 1917. As a result of our unwillingness before 1917 to face the fact that we might sometime be involved in the war, the tremendous amount of preparation described in this chapter had to be done in a few months, or even in a few weeks. When things have to be done in such a great hurry, missteps are often made and unfortunate delays result. In spite of all difficulties, however, the United States had, at the end of 1917, 250,000 troops in France and a million and a half in training camps. Guns, rifles, clothing, shoes, food, and other necessary supplies were being produced in sufficient quantities. On the other side of the Atlantic, our engineers and railroad men were busy constructing docks, warehouses, and miles of railroad for the purpose of providing bases of supplies for our soldiers in France. Much of the equipment of these railroads and docks cars, locomotives, and unloading machinery had been brought from America. More soldiers sent to France. As the troops in the various camps and cantonments were trained, they were sent to ports on the eastern coast and embarked for France, their places in camp being taken by new groups of drafted men. Beginning with 50,000 or 60,000 each month, the number sent abroad was rapidly increased until by the fall of 1918, their troops were going over at the rate of more than 300,000 a month. By October 15, there were over two million of our soldiers in France and another million or more under training in this country. Decrease in submarine sinkings. The Germans had boasted in vain that their submarines would prevent the transportation of American troops to Europe. Of the hundreds of transports engaged in this work, up to November 1918, only two were sunk while on the eastward voyage and less than 300 American soldiers were drowned. Moreover, during the year 1918, there was a notable decrease in the destruction of merchant vessels by submarines. This was due probably to a variety of causes, but especially to the increased protection provided by the convoy system and to the more efficient methods of fighting the submarines. It has been found that it is possible to see a submarine at some distance below the surface if the observer is in a balloon or an airplane. Therefore, the submarine hunters do not need to wait for the submarine to show itself. The sea is patrolled by balloons and airplanes in conjunction with fast destroyers. When the aircraft has located a submarine, the fact is signaled to a destroyer. When the destroyer arrives over the submarine, it drops a depth bomb, which is arranged to explode after it has sunk to any desired depth in the water. It is believed that the submarines are being destroyed faster than Germany can build them, and also that it is increasingly difficult for Germany to obtain the highly trained crews necessary to manage the complex machinery of a submarine. For it must be remembered that the circumstances under which submarines are destroyed almost always involve the loss of the crew. Submarines raid the Atlantic coast. Unable to face the convoys of transports, several submarines paid visits to our coast in the summer of 1918 and destroyed a considerable number of unarmed vessels, mostly small craft. Many of the victims indeed were very small fishing boats, which are by international agreement exempt from capture or destruction. German propaganda. Before the United States entered the war, our people were divided in their sympathies between the Central Powers and the Allies. Those who believed that Germany was right were chiefly people of German birth or descent, though a large majority even of this group did not believe in the things for which Germany was fighting. Since the United States was neutral, their attitude was perfectly legal, provided their sympathies did not lead them to commit crimes against the United States in their zeal to hinder the cause of the Allies. Unfortunately, ever since we entered the war, some of these people, still keeping on the side of Germany, have endeavored in every way to prevent the success of the American cause. Some of these men and women are American born. Others have, through naturalization, sworn to uphold the government of the United States, but still others have remained subjects of the Central Powers. They have organized plots either to destroy property or to spread rumors intended to interfere with the prosecution of the war and to undermine confidence in the government. Unitions factories have been blown up and information has been secretly sent to German authorities concerning the movements of ships so that they could be attacked by submarines. Worse than all else perhaps is the circulation of groundless rumors such as those stating that the soldiers have insufficient food or clothing or insinuating that officers of the government are guilty of outrageous offenses in the treatment of men and women who have entered war service. The Citizen and the Propagandist It is the duty of every true citizen, boy or girl, man or woman, to do two things to stop this treason talk. First, when someone tells you a thing about our government that ought not to be true and sounds as if the speaker was trying to undermine the efforts of our country to win the war, ask him, how do you know? And then report the matter to the first policeman or other trustworthy person that you meet. The second thing you should do is carefully to avoid spreading any such rumors that you may hear. How the government controls propaganda. Our country has sought to control the treasonable work of these propagandists in three ways. First, all who are subjects of any enemy country and who are above fourteen years of age must be enrolled and must carry a certificate with them wherever they go. They may not live within a half mile of Navy yards, arsenals or other places where war work is going on and they may not go within three hundred feet of any wharf or dock. Secondly, those whose conduct has been suspicious or who have displayed active sympathy with the enemy in speech or act, as well as certain persons who were in official relationship with Germany, are interned for the duration of the war. Internment means that they are under closed guard in a camp or in a small district but otherwise have considerable freedom. In the third place, German sympathizers who have committed or have attempted to commit crimes endangering the lives of our citizens or interfering in any way with the conduct of the war have been sent to prison for long terms. End of Chapter 13. Chapter 14 of A School History of the Great War This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Barry Eads. A School History of the Great War by McKinley, Colm and Gerson. Chapter 14. Questions of the Coming Peace There are two kinds of problems which must be solved by the American people before permanent peace conditions can be established. One group of problems is composed of international questions, largely pertaining to the European states but in which the United States is vitally interested. The other group of problems relates to the restoration of our people and industries to a peace condition. On some points these two groups of problems are closely related and cannot be settled separately. Some internal questions will have to be viewed in the light of world affairs, and some international problems must be given solutions which will have influences within our own country. Ignoring the overlapping of the two groups, we shall study the problems of peace in this chapter under two headings. One, national problems. Two, international problems. One, national problems. Among the many internal problems which the country will face at the close of the war and to which every American should today be giving his earnest thought, the following are especially important. Getting the Men Home Even while engaged in the task of getting every available man to the fighting line in Europe, the American authorities have found time to think of the return movement. It will be a great undertaking, requiring many months to see that each man reaches American shores and after his dismissal is safely sent to his hometown. The Care of the Wounded During the war, the greatest pains have been taken by the medical officers of the army and by the Red Cross agents to bring immediate relief to the brave wounded men and to nurse them back to health. But many of them will have sacrificed an eye or a limb or will have received wounds which will prevent their engaging in their previous occupations. It is the high duty of the nation to save such men from a life of pain or of enforced idleness. It should not permit them to subsist by charity or even pensions. The wounded man, crippled for life in his nation's service, will be educated in a vocation which will occupy his mind, make him independent, and render him a respected and self-respecting member of his community. This great educational work has already been started. Courses of study have been put into operation and positions in various industrial plants have been guaranteed to the men after the training is completed. The nation will perform its whole duty to its heroes. The Reconstruction of Industry The war has called into existence great plants for the manufacture of the specialties needed in warfare. Such factories must, after the close of the war, be made over and set to the task of creating goods for the days of peace. Machinery will be reconstructed, agencies for the sale of goods must be established, and foreign trade sought as possible market for the enlarged production. The Reorganization of Labor American working people, whether they be managers of plants or workmen at the machine, have been wonderfully loyal to the nation during the war. They have shifted their work, their homes, and their aspirations to meet the needs of the war. When peace returns, all this talent and skill must be turned into other channels. This, we hope, can be accomplished without unemployment on a large scale and without any loss of time or pay, but it will require great directing ability and a friendly attitude of employees and employers toward each other. Financial Reconstruction The finances of the government, of corporations, and of businessmen have been greatly changed during the course of the war. There may never be a complete return to the old conditions, but it is certain that peace will create problems of finance almost as serious as those of war. Legislative Changes Our legislative bodies, particularly the Congress, will be called upon to pass many laws to aid the country to resume its peaceful life and occupations. All of the problems mentioned here, as well as many others, will require the enactment of new laws. We shall need congressmen and state legislatures of wisdom, patriotism, and special knowledge to act intelligently for the people on these problems. The international settlements mentioned below also may require the action of the Senate upon treaties and the action of both houses where laws are necessary to carry out our international agreements. The war has called for statement ship of the highest order. The coming peace will make equal demands upon the wisdom and self-control of our statesmen and politicians. 2. International Problems President Wilson, on January 8, 1918, addressed Congress in a speech which was designed to set forth the war aims and peace terms of the United States. Every American should be familiar with the terms of this 14-point speech. Each one of the terms abdicated by the President is given below in the President's own words, and a short, explanatory paragraph is added to each. 1. Open Covenants of Peace, openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kind, but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in the public view. The President here speaks against the underhand diplomacy and secret alliances which have been a feature of European history in the past. By this practice a few diplomats and monarchs made whatever treaties they wished, not presenting them for ratification to the people's representatives and yet binding every individual citizen to abide by the terms adopted. Such secret provisions have often been agreed to simply upon the whim or the ambition or the likes and dislikes of the rulers. They have sometimes been opposed to the true interests of the nations involved. They are undemocratic and are not in accord with American ideas. 2. Absolute freedom of navigation upon the seas, outside territorial waters, alike in peace and in war, except as the seas may be closed in whole or in part by international action for the enforcement of international covenants. Since 1793 the United States has stood for the freedom of the seas and the right of neutrals to carry on their trade in time of war as well as in time of peace. Germany's violation of our rights as a neutral by her submarine warfare was one of the causes of our taking up arms against her. By territorial waters the President here means the waters within three miles from shore, which are universally held to be under the complete control of the adjoining state. By international covenants are probably meant such covenants and guarantees as those mentioned in points 14, 1, 4, 11, 12, and 13. 3. The removal so far as possible of all economic barriers and the establishment of inequality of trade conditions among all the nations consenting to the peace and associating themselves for its maintenance. Economic barriers are mainly restrictions upon trade and commerce. These restrictions take various forms. They may be prohibitive custom duties or excessive port, tonnage, or harbor charges. They may be trade agreements granting favors to the citizens of one country and not to those of another. The President urges the establishment of inequality of such trade conditions. 4. Adequate guarantees given and taken that national armaments will be reduced to the lowest point consistent with domestic safety. The President here touches one of the most important problems of the coming peace. This has often been called a war against war. It has been said that it will be the last war. The sentiment which leads to such statements has its origin in a hatred of militarism. Great armaments were created because of the danger from Prussia militarism, and great armaments will still be necessary unless this intolerable thing is crushed or shut out from the friendly intercourse of the nations. When it is crushed, some adequate steps must be taken by each state to reduce its armaments, on condition that all other states do the same. But many problems will face the world's statesmen in preparing a plan for guaranteed disarmament. How large a force will each nation need to maintain its domestic safety? How shall we be sure that Germany will not break her promise, as she has so often done in this war? How shall we be sure that Germany, or perhaps some other state, will not again secretly prepare for a war while others remain unprepared? 5. A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty, the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined. In the opening chapters of this book, we have seen how colonial rivalry was one of the causes of the World War. The President urges that the settlement after the war shall be free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial. He introduces here the democratic principle that the interests of the populations in the colonies shall have equal weight with just claims of the European states. Such a principle probably will mean that few, if any, of Germany's colonies can be returned to her, because her colonial management has been neglectful of the interests of the subject peoples. 6. The evacuation of all Russian territory and such a settlement of all questions affecting Russia as will secure the best and freest cooperation of the other nations of the world in obtaining for her an unhampered and unembarrassed opportunity for the independent determination of her own political development and national policy and assure her of a sincere welcome into the society of free nations under institutions of her own choosing, and more than a welcome assistance also of every kind that she may need and may herself desire. The treatment accorded Russia by her sister nations in the months to come will be the acid test of their goodwill, of their comprehension of her needs as distinguished from their own interests, and of their intelligent and unselfish sympathy. No restatement of the President's words on this subject is necessary. The Russian Revolution is one of the most important results of the Great War. How can the future welfare of Russia be best secured? 7. Belgium, the whole world will agree, must be evacuated and restored without any attempt to limit the sovereignty which she enjoys in common with all other free nations. No other single act will serve as this will serve to restore confidence among the nations in the laws which they have themselves set and determined for the government of their relations with one another. Without this healing act, the whole structure and validity of international law is forever impaired. The evacuation of Belgium will follow the military victories of the United States and her associates. The restoration of Belgium will be difficult to effect. It implies relief to her suffering and starving people, the return of many exiles to Belgium, the erection of new homes for them, three organization of industry and transportation, and the repair and rebuilding of her historic edifices. Where will the funds come from for such work? Germany, the aggressor, surely should bear a part or all of the cost. 8. All French territory should be freed and the invaded portions restored, and the wrong done to France by Prussia in 1871 in the matter of Alsace-Lorraine, which has unsettled the peace of the world for nearly fifty years, should be righted in order that peace may once more be made secure in the interest of all. Here the President urges the same treatment for the occupied lands of northern France as for those of Belgium. The devastated lands must be reclaimed, the inhabitants cared for, an adequate means provided by which they can earn a livelihood. Further, he advises the return of Alsace-Lorraine to France. Such action not only will right the wrong done to France in 1871, but also it will take from Germany much of the iron-producing areas which have made it possible for her to prepare and carry on this war, and which might permit her to get ready for a yet more dreadful war in the future. 9. A readjustment of the frontiers of Italy should be affected along clearly recognizable lines of nationality. We have seen how a considerable area inhabited by Italians was not freed from Austrian rule when the Italian kingdom was founded. This territory, called Italia Irredenta, unredeemed Italy, and this population by its own desire and by natural right belonged to Italy and should be brought within the nation. 10. The peoples of Austria-Hungary, whose place among the nations we wish to see safeguarded and assured, should be accorded the freest opportunity of autonomous development. Within the Austro-Hungarian boundaries are several nationalities which have been subjected to the oppressive rule of peoples different from themselves. Their attempts to obtain home rule or independence have been crushed. America now wishes to secure for these peoples the opportunity to establish governments for themselves, as we have already seen our country in 1918 formally recognize the independence of one of these peoples, the Czechoslovaks or inhabitants of Bohemia and neighboring districts. Moreover, in a note to Austria-Hungary, October 18, 1918, President Wilson stated that conditions had changed since January 8 and intimidated that both the Czechoslovaks and the Yugoslavs should be given independence. 11. Romania, Serbia and Montenegro should be evacuated, occupied territories restored, Serbia accorded free and secure access to the sea and the relations of the several Balkan states to one another determined by friendly council along historically established lines of allegiance and nationality, and international guarantees of the political and economic independence and territorial integrity of the several Balkan states should be entered into. We have here a comprehensive plan for this settlement of the Balkan jealousies, which have disturbed Europe for many years. Evacuation and restoration is here proposed as in Belgium and France. Serbia, always thwarted by Austria in her hopes for a port, is to be given access to the sea. Friendly council shall be given the Balkan peoples to aid them in establishing their governments along the lines of nationalities and of historic sympathies. All the countries of the world should unite to guarantee and protect the safety and independence of the governments established in the Balkan region. 12. The Turkish portions of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanials should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees. The horrible rule of the Turks over subject peoples must cease. The Turks, as well as all other peoples, should be allowed the right of self-government. But their subject peoples must also be protected in their lives, property, and occupations, and given an opportunity to establish self-government when they desire it. The Dardanials straight must be taken out of the power of the Turks, and placed under the control of the associated nations. 13. An independent Polish state should be erected which should include the territories inhabited by undisputably Polish populations, which should be assured a free and secure access to the sea, and whose political and economic independence and territorial integrity should be guaranteed by international covenant. A nation composed of Poles would imply the union of parts of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, since all of these three countries took part in the infamous partition of Poland in the 18th century. Access to the Baltic Sea would be necessary for the prosperity and independence of the new state, but such access could be gained only across territory which Prussia has held for a century and a half. The associated nations will guarantee the independence of Poland in the same way that they would protect Belgium, Serbia, and other states erected upon the principle of national self-government. 14. A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike. This is the most important of the President's suggestions. Without some form of a League of Nations, it will be impossible to adopt and carry out the other terms of the President's program. International guarantees, so frequently mentioned in his proposals, imply some means by which the countries of the world can act together for their common purposes. Restoration of devastated lands, disarmament, new democratic governments, freedom of commerce—all of these things will remain nothing but rainbow hopes, unless the large and small nations of the world unite for their realization. A League of Nations, more or less regularly organized, must be formed if the democracies of the world shall be made safe from future wars of aggression. 15. Chronology, principle events of the war. 1914. June 28, murder of Archduke Francis Ferdinand at Sarajevo. July 5, conference at Potsdam. July 23, Austria-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia. July 28, Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia. July 31, German ultimatums to Russia and France. August 1, Germany declares war on Russia and invades Luxembourg. August 2, German ultimatum to Belgium, demanding a free passage for her troops across Belgium. August 3, Germany declares war on France. August 4 to 26, most of Belgium overrun. Liege occupied August 9, Brussels August 20, Nehmer August 24. August 4, Great Britain declares war on Germany. August 4, President Wilson proclaims neutrality of the United States. August 6, Austria-Hungary declares war on Russia. August 12, France and Great Britain declare war on Austria-Hungary. August 16, British expeditionary force landed in France. August 18, Russia invades East Prussia. August 21 to 23, Battle of Mont-Charleroi, dogged retreat of French and British in the face of the German invasion. August 23, Japan declares war on Germany. August 23, St. Tau, Kauachau, bombarded by Japanese. August 25 to December 15, Russia overruns Galicia. Limburg taken, September 2. Przemsel besieged, August 16 to October 15, and again after November 12. December 4, Russians three and a half miles from Krakow. August 26, Germans destroy Levan in Belgium. August 26, Allies conquer Togo in Africa. August 26 to 31, Russians defeated in Battle of Tannenberg. August 28, British naval victory of Hegelheim Bight in North Sea. August 31, name of St. Petersburg changed to Petrograd. September 5, Great Britain, France and Russia agree not to make peace separately. September 6 through 10, First Battle of the Marne. September 7, Germans take Mabouge in Northern France. September 11, Australians take German New Guinea, etc. September 12 through 17, Battle of the Essen. September 16, Russians driven from East Prussia. September 22, Three British armed cruisers sunk by a submarine. September 27, Invasion of German Southwest Africa by General Bothe. October 9, Germans occupy Antwerp, the chief port of Belgium. October 16 to 28, Battle of the Yassir and Flanders, Belgium. Belgians in French halt German advance. October 17 to November 15, Battle of Flanders near Ypres, saving channel ports. October 21 to 28, German armies driven back in Poland. October 28 to December 8, the Wetz Rebellion in British South Africa. October 29, Turkish warship bombards Odessa, Russia. November 1, German naval victory off the coast of Chile. November 3 to 5, Russia, France, and Great Britain declare war on Turkey. November 7, Fall of Singtao, Kia-Chao to the Japanese and British. November 10 to December 14, Austrian Invasion of Serbia. November 10, German cruiser Enden destroyed an Indian Ocean. November 21, Bashra on Persian Gulf occupied by British. December 8, British naval victory off the Falkland Islands. December 16, German warships bombard towns on east coast of England. December 17, Egypt proclaimed a British protectorate under a Sultan. December 24, First German air raid on England. 1915, January 1 to February 13, Russians attempt to cross the Carpathians. January 24, British naval victory off the Dogger Bank in North Sea. January 25 to February 12, Russians again invade East Prussia, but are defeated in the battle of the Missouri and Lakes. January 28, American merchantman William P. Fry, sunk by German cruiser. February 4, Germany's proclamation of war zone around the British Isles after February 18. February 10, United States note holding German government to a strict accountability for destruction of American lives or vessels. February 10, Anglo-French squadron bombards Dardanelles forts. March 1, announcement of British blockade of Germany. March 10, British captor New Chappelle in northern France. March 22, Russians capture Prismel in Galicia. April 17 to May 17, battle of Ypres, first use of poison gas. April 25, Allied troops land on the Gallipoli Peninsula. April 30, Germans invade the Baltic provinces of Russia. May 1, American steamship Gulflight, sunk by German submarine. Two Americans lost. May 2, battle of the Dunajek. Russians defeated by the Germans and Austrians and forced to retire from the Carpathians. May 7, British liner Lusitania, sunk by German submarine. 1,154 lives lost, 114 being Americans. May 9 to June. Battle of Artois, or festival in France, north of Arius. Small gains by the Allies. May 13, American note protest against submarine policy culminating in the sinking of Lusitania. Other notes, June 9, July 21. German replies, May 28, July 8, September 1. May 23, Italy declares war on Austria-Hungary. May 25, American steamship Nebraska and attacked by submarine. June 3, Prezmal taken by Germans and Austrians. June 9, Mon Falcone occupied by Italians. June 22, the Austro-Germans recapture Limburg in Galicia. July 2, naval action between Russians and Germans in the Baltic. July 9, conquest of Germans southwest Africa completed. July 12 to September 18. German conquest of Russian Poland. Capture of Warsaw, August 5. Kovno, August 17. Brest-Litovsk, August 25. Vilna, September 18. August 19, British liner Arabic, sunk by submarine. 44 victims, two Americans. August 21, Italy declares war on Turkey. September 1. The German ambassador, Von Birstorff, gives assurance that German submarines will sink no more liners without warning. September 8. United States demands recall of Austro-Hungarian ambassador Dr. Dumba. September 25 to October. French offensive in Champagne fails to break through German lines. September 27. Small British progress in Luce near Lenz. October 4. Russian ultimatum to Bulgaria. October 5. Allied forces land at Salonika at the invitation of the Greek government. October 5. German government regrets and disavows sinking of Arabic, and is prepared to pay indendities. October 6 to December 2. Austria-German-Bulgarian conquest of Serbia. Fall of Belgrade, October 9. Nish, November 1. Monaster, December 2. October 13. Germans execute the English nurse Edith Cavill for aiding Belgians to escape from Belgium. October 14. Bulgaria declares war on Serbia. October 15 to 19. Great Britain, France, Russia, and Italy declare war against Bulgaria. November 10 to April. Russian forces advance in the Persia as a result of pro-German activities there. December 1. British under General Townsend retreat from near Baghdad to Kut Elimara. December 3. United States government demands recall of Captain Boyd and Captain Van Papen at the shades of the German embassy. December 6. Germans capture Ipac in Montenegro. December 15. Sir Douglas Hague succeeds Sir John French in command of the British Army in France. December 19. British forces withdraw from parts of Gallipoli Peninsula. 1916. January 8. Evacuation of Gallipoli completed. January 13. Fall of Sintenge, capital of Montenegro. February 10. Germany notifies neutral powers that armed merchant ships will be treated as warships and will be sunk without warning. February 15. Secretary Lansing states that by international law, commercial vessels have right to carry arms and self-defense. February 16. Germany sends note acknowledging her liability in the Lusitania affair. February 16. Russians take Ezurim in Turkish Armenia. February 16. Cameron, Africa conquered. February 21 to July. Battle of Verdun. February 24. President Wilson in letter to Senator Stone refuses to advise American citizens not to travel on armed merchant ships. March 8. Germany declares war on Portugal. March 24. French steamer Sussex is torpedoed without warning. February 18. Russians capture Trebizond in Turkey. April 18. United States note declaring that she will sever diplomatic relations unless Germany abandons present methods of submarine warfare. April 24 to May 1. Insurrection in Ireland. April 29. General Townsend surrenders at Kut Elimara. May 4. Germany's conditional pledge not to sink merchant ships without warning. May 14 to June 3. Great Austrian attack on the Italians through the Trentino. May 19. Russians join British on the Tigris. May 24. Conscription bill becomes a law in Great Britain. May 31. Naval battle off Jutland in North Sea. June 4 to 30. Russian offensive in Galicia and Bukowina. June 5. Lord Kitchener drowned. July 1 to November 17. Battle of the Somme. July 27. Germans execute Captain Friot, an Englishman, for having defended his merchant ship by ramming the German submarine that was about to attack it. August 9. Italians capture Garizia. August 27. Italy declares war on Germany. August 27 to January 15. Romania enters war on the side of the Allies, and most of the country is overrun. October 7. German submarine appears off American coast and sinks British passenger steamer Stefano. November 19. Monastery retaken by Allies, chiefly Serbians. November 29. United States protests against Belgian deportations. December 6. Lloyd George succeed Esquith as British prime minister. December 12. German peace offer. Refused December 30 as empty and insincere. December 18. President Wilson's peace note. Germany replies evasively December 26. Intante Allies reply January 10. Demands restorations, reparation, and denities. 1917. January 10. The Allied government state their terms of peace. January 31. Germany announces unrestricted submarine warfare in specified zones. February 3. United States severs diplomatic relations with Germany. February 24. Kut El Amara, taken by British under General Maude. February 26. President Wilson asked authority to arm merchant ships. February 28. Zimmerman note published. March 11. Baghdad captured by British under General Maude. March 11 to 15. Revolution in Russia, leading to abdication of Tsar Nicholas II. March 15. Provisional government formed by constitutional Democrats under Prince Lovov. March 12. United States announces that an arm guard will be placed on all American merchant vessels sailing through the war zone. March 17 to 19. Retirement of Germans to the Hindenburg Line. March 24. Minister Brand Whitlock and American Relief Commission withdrawn from Belgium. April 2. President Wilson asked Congress to declare the existence of a state of war with Germany. April 6. United States declares war on Germany. April 8. Austria-Hungary severs diplomatic relations with the United States. April 9 to May 14. British successes in battle of Eris. Vimy Ridge taken. April 9. April 16 to May 6. French successes in battle of the Essenes between Sassan and Reims. April 21. Turkey severs relations with the United States. May 4. American destroyers begin cooperation with British Navy and war zone. May 15 to September 15. Great Italian offensive on a Sanzo front. May 15. General Petan succeeds General Nevelle as commander-in-chief of the French armies. May 18. President Wilson signs Selective Service Act. June 7. British blow up Messeney Ridge south of Vipra and capture 7,500 German prisoners. June 10. Italian offensive in Trentino. June 12. King Constantine of Greece forced to abdicate. June 26. First American troops reach France. June 29. Greece enters war against Germany and her allies. July 1. Russian army led in person by Khorinsky, the minister of war, begins an offensive in Galicia, ending in disastrous retreat. July 19 to August 3. July 20. Khorinsky succeeds Prince Lovov as Premier of Russia. July 30. Mutiny and German fleet at Wilhelmschaben and Kiel. Second mutiny, September 2. July 31 to November. Battle of Flanders. Passchendaele Ridge. British successes. August 15. Peace proposals of Pope Benedict published. Dated August 1. United States replies August 27. Germany and Austria, September 21. August 15. Canadians capture Hill 70, dominating Lenz. August 19 to 24. New Italian drive on the Isonzo front. August 20 to 24. French attacks at Verdun recapture high ground lost in 1916. September 3. Riga captured by Germans. September 8. Luxembourg dispatches. Sperlos versenkt, published by United States. September 15. Russia proclaimed a republic. October 17. Russians defeated in a naval engagement in the Gulf of Riga. October 14 to December. Great German-Austrian invasion of Italy. Italian lines shifted to Piave River. October 26. Brazil declares war on Germany. November 2. Germans retreat from the Chemin-de-Dame in France. November 3. First clash of American with German soldiers. November 7. Overthrow of Kerensky and provisional government of Russia by the Bolsheviks. November 13. Clemenceau succeeds Rabot as French Premier. November 20 to December 13. Battle of Cambry. November 29. First plenary session of the Inner Allied Conference in Paris. Sixteen nations represented. Colonel E. M. House, Chairman of American delegation. December 3. Conquest of German East Africa completed. December 6. U.S. destroyer Jacob Jones, sunk by submarine with loss of over 60 American men. December 6. Explosion on munitions vessel Rex Halifax. December 7. United States declares war on Austria-Hungary. December 10. Jerusalem captured by British. December 23. Peace negotiations opened at Brest-Litovsk between Bolshevik government and Central Powers. December 28. President Wilson takes over the control of railroads. 1918. January 4. British hospital ship Rewa, torpedoed and sunk in English Channel. January 8. President Wilson sets forth peace program of the United States. January 18. Russian constituent assembly meets in Petrograd. January 19. The Bolsheviks dissolve the Russian assembly. January 28. Revolution begins in Finland, fighting between white guards and red guards. January 28-29. Big German air raid on London. January 30. German air raid on Paris. February 3. American troops officially announced to be on the Laurent Front near Toul. February 5. British transport Tuscania with 2,179 American troops on board, torpedoed and sunk. 211 American soldiers lost. February 9. February 9. Ukrainian makes peace with Germany. February 10. The Bolsheviks ordered demobilization of the Russian army. February 14. Bolopasha, condemned for treason against France. Executed April 16. February 17. Cossack General Kaladines commits suicide. Collapse of Cossack revolution against the Bolsheviks. February 18. Russia-German armistice declared at an end by Germany. War resumed. Germans occupied Da Vinci, Minsk and other cities. February 21. German troops land in Finland. February 23. Turkish troops drive back the Russians in the northeast. Trebizond taken February 26. Erzurum, March 14. March 2. German and Ukrainian troops defeat the Bolsheviks near Kiev in Ukraine. March 3. Bolsheviks signed peace treaty with Germany at Brest-Litovsk. Redified by Soviet Congress at Moscow, March 15. March 7. Finland and Germany sign a treaty of peace. March 10. Announcement that American troops are occupying trenches at four different points on French front. March 11. First Holy American Raid, made in sector north of Toul, meets with success. March 11. Great German air raid on Paris, by more than 50 planes. March 13. German troops occupy Odessa on Black Sea. March 21 to April 1. First German drive of the year on 50-mile front, extending to Mont-de-Dere. April 9 to 18. Second German drive on a 30-mile front between Ypres and Eris. May 6. Romania signs peace treaty with the Central Powers. May 7. Nicaragua declares war on Germany and her allies. May 9 through 10. British naval force attempts to block Ostend Harbor. May 14. Caucasus proclaims itself an independent state, but the Turks overrun the southern part and take Baku September 19. May 21. British transport Moldavia is sunk, with loss of 53 American soldiers. May 24. Major General March appointed Chief of Staff with the rank of General. May 24. Costa Rica declares war on the Central Powers. May 25 to June. German submarines appear off American coast and sink 19 coast-wise vessels, including Puerto Rico-Liner Carolina, with loss of 16 lives. May 27 to June 1. Third German drive, capturing the Chemin-de-Dame and reaching the Marne River east of Chateau-Theré. American Marines aid French at Chateau-Theré. May 28. American forces near Montedeu capture tillage of Cantigny and hold it against numerous counterattacks. May 31. U.S. transport President Lincoln sunk by U-boat while on her way to the United States. 23 lives lost. June 9 to 16. Fourth German drive on 20-mile front east of Montedeu makes only small gains. June 10. Italian naval forces sink one Austrian dreadnought and damage another in the Adriatic. June 11. American Marines take blue wood with 800 prisoners. June 14. Turkish troops occupy Tepris, Persia. June 15. General March announces that there are 800,000 American troops in France. June 15 to July 6. Austrian offensive against Italy fails with heavy losses. June 21. Official statement that American forces hold 39 miles of French front in six sectors. June 27. British hospital ship Landovery Castle is torpedoed off Irish coast with loss of 234 lives. Only 24 survived. July 10. Italians and French take Barrette in Albania. July 13. Czechoslovak troops occupy Urkust and Siberia. July 15 to 18. Anglo-American forces occupy strategic positions in the Roman coast and northwestern Russia. July 15 to 18. Fifth German drive extends three miles south of the Marne, but east the Reims makes no gain. July 16. Exzar Nicholas executed by Bolshevik authorities. July 18 to August 4. Second battle of the Marne. Beginning with Fox counter offensive between Cessons and Chateau Theré. French and Americans drive the Germans back from the Marne, nearly to the Essen. July 22. Honduras declares war on Germany. July 27. American troops arrive on the Italian front. July 31. President Wilson takes over telegraph and telephone systems. August 2. Allies occupy Arkangel in northern Russia. August 8 to September. Allies attack successfully near Montede and continue the drive until the Germans are back at the Hindenburg line, giving up practically all the ground they had gained this year. August 15. American troops land in eastern Siberia. September 3. The United States recognizes the Czechoslovak government. September 12 to 13. Americans take the St. Michael's Salant near Metz. September 15. Allied Army under General Desperé begins campaign against Bulgarians. September 16. President Wilson receives an Austrian proposal for a peace conference and refuses it. September 22. Great victory of British and Arabs over Turks and Palestine. September 26. Americans begin a drive in the Moose Valley. September 30. Bulgaria withdraws from the war. October 1. St. Quentin on the Hindenburg line taken by the French. October 1. Damascus captured by the British. October 3. King Ferdinand of Bulgaria advocates. October 3. Lens taken by the British. October 4. Germany asks President Wilson for an armistice and peace negotiations. Other notes on October 12, 20, etc. Similar notes from Austria-Hungary October 7. And from Turkey October 12. Wilson's replies October 8, 14, 18, 23. October 7. Beirut taken by a French fleet. October 8. Cambrai taken by the British. October 13. Leon taken by the French. October 17. Austin taken by the Belgians. October 17. Lille taken by the British. October 24 to November 4. Allied forces, chiefly Italians, under General Diaz, win a great victory on the Italian front. October 26. Aleppo taken by the British. October 31. Turkey surrenders. November 1. Serbian troops enter Belgrade after regaining nearly all of Serbia. November 3. Trieste and Trent occupied by Italian forces. November 4. Surrender of Austria-Hungary. November 5. President Wilson notifies Germany that General Fosch has been authorized by the United States and the Allies to communicate the terms of an armistice. November 6. Mutiny of German sailors at Kiel, followed by mutinies, revolts and revolutions at other German cities. November 7. Americans take Sudan. November 9. British take Mabage. November 9. Announcement that the German Emperor Wilhelm II has decided to renounce the throne. He flees to Holland November 10 and signs a formal abdication November 28. November 11. Armistice signed. Germany surrenders. End of Section 15. End of A School History of the Great War. By McKinley Coulomb and Gerson. Recording by James Christopher, JX Christopher at Yahoo.com. Recorded for LibriVox. November 2009. Happy Armistice Day.


So the best of my ability is I'm joining this to keep the moment true and I'm gonna tell you this evening's background has put it right into the question. And we think that the data can only be used when it's a building, when it's a building, and when it's a complex. So talking a little bit in this room is just across the street. We're going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. We're going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today. I'm going to talk a little bit about what we're going to talk about today.