>> Announcer: Live from Washington DC, it's theCUBE, covering .conf2017, brought to you by Splunk. >> Well good morning, welcome to day two, Splunk .conf2017 here in Washington DC, theCUBE very proud to be here again for the seventh time I believe this is. John Walls, Dave Vellante. Good morning, sir, how are you doing, David? >> I'm doing well thank you. >> Did you have a good night? >> Yeah, great night. >> DC, I know your son's here >> Walked round the district a little bit, yeah, it was good. >> It's good to have you here. >> At the party last night upstairs, (John laughs) talked to a few customers, trying to find out what they didn't like about Splunk, and it was not a lot of things. >> That would be a short conversation I think. We can do us, we got a couple of keynote rockstars with us this morning, Haiyan Song, who's the Senior Vice President of Security Markets at Splunk. Haiyan, good to see you again. >> Great to see you too. >> John: Thanks for coming back, Monzy Merza, who was the Head of Cybersecurity Research at Splunk. >> Thank you for having me. >> John: Monzy, commanding the stage with great acumen today, good job there. >> Monzy: Thank you. >> Yeah we'll get into that a little bit later. But first off, let's just kind of set the table here a little bit. I know this is a bit of transformational year for you in terms of security, in how you're building out your portfolio, and your services, and so kind of walk us through that. What are you doing, Haiyan, in terms of, I guess being available, right, for whomever, whenever, wherever they are in their security journey you might say. >> Journey is the keyword this year, and nerve center is another one that I highlighted at my super session yesterday. So when I reflect on, this is your seventh year, and when I reflect on the last three years, right, we came in and really talked about the enterprise security product on the first year. And second year we talked about, you know, how UBA adds to the capabilities for better detection and machine learning. We introduced different features. This year we didn't start the conversation on, "Here's a new feature". This year we started the conversation on you need to build a security nerve center. That's the new defense system. And there's a journey to get there, and our role is to enable you on that journey every step of the way. So it's portfolio message, and not only for the very advanced customers, who want machine learning, who want to customize the thread models. Also for people who just started, to say I have the data, and help me get more insight into this, or help me understand how leverage machine data across domains to really correlate and connect the dots, and do investigations. Or what are the important things to set up the basic operations. Very, very excited about the ability, transformational year, as you mentioned, that we can bring the full portfolio to our customer. >> So, Monzy, you've said in your keynote today, defenders can succeed. We talked off camera, you're an optimist. And all we need is this nerve center. So to date, has that nerve center been missing, has it been there and people haven't been able to take advantage of it, have the tools been too complicated? I wonder if you could unpack that a little bit? >> I think what's happened over the course of many years, as the security ecosystem matures and evolves, there are a lot of expert technologies in a variety of different areas, and it's a matter of bringing those expert technologies together, so that the operations teams can really take advantage of them. And you know, it's one thing to have a capability, but it's another to leverage that capability along with another capability and combine the forces together, and really that's the message, that's Haiyan's message, that's been there for the nerve center, that we can bring together. And so when I say the defender has an advantage, I mean that, because I feel that the operations teams, the IT teams, as well as the security teams, have laid out a path, and the attacker cannot escape that path. You have to walk down a certain path to get to something to achieve or to steal or to do whatever, or damage that you need to do. So when you have a nerve center, you can bring all the instrumentation that's been placed along those path to make use of it. So the attacker has to work within that terrain. They cannot escape that terrain. And that's what I mean, is the nerve center allows for that to occur. >> Now you guys have talked for a long time about bringing analytics and security, those worlds together. We've always been a big obviously proponent of that, but spending's just starting to shift, right. They're still spending a lot of money on the perimeter. I guess you have to. We all see the numbers, security investments continue to increase. But where are we today with regard to analytics and being able to proactively both identify and remediate? >> So I just echo what you just said. I'm so pleased to see the industry started the shifts. I think being analytics-driven is really top of mind for people, and using machine learning automation to help really speed up the detection and even response are top of mind. We just did a CISO Customer Advisory Report on Monday, and we always ask when we start the meetings, "Tell us your top of mind challenges, "tell us your top of, you know two investment, and what's the recommendation for Splunk?" And better, faster response, better faster detection and automation and analytics is top of mind for everybody. So for us, this year, extremely, extremely happy to talk about how we're completing that narrative for analytics-driven security. >> Well on that point, you talk about analytics stories, and filling gaps, putting an entire narrative together so that somebody could loosen up the nuts, and they can see exactly where intrusions occur, what steps could be taken, and so on and so forth. So, I mean, dig a little deeper on that for us, maybe Monzy, you can jump on that, about what this concept of analytics stories, and then how you're translating that into your workplace. >> We thought about this for quite some time in terms of drilling down and saying, as analysts and practitioners, what is it that we desire? The security research team at Splunk is composed of people who spend many, many years in the trenches. So what do we want, what did we always want, and what was hard? And instead of trying to approach it from the perspective of, you know, let's just connect the dots, really take an adversarial model approach to say, "What does an adversary actually do?" and then as a defender, what do I do when I see certain things happening? And I see things on the network, I see things on the end point, and that's good, and a lot of people talk about that. But what do I do next? As the analyst, where do I go, and what would be helpful to me? So we took this concept of saying, let's not call them anything else, we actually fought over this for quite some time. These are not use cases, because use case has a very different connotation. We wanted stories because an adversary starts somewhere, adversary takes some action. The defender may see some of that action, but then the defender carries on and does other things, so we really had this notion of a day in the life, and we wanted to capture that day in the life of the prospective of what's important to their business, and really encapsulate that as a narrative, so that when the analysts and security operations teams get their hands on this stuff, they're not bootstrapping their way through the process. They have a whole story that they can play through, and they can say, and if it doesn't make sense to them, that's okay, they can modify the story, and then have a complete narrative to understand the threat, and to understand their own actions. >> So we hear the stat a lot about how long it takes for organizations to identify an intrusion. It ranges I've been seeing, you know, service now flashing 191, I've seen it as high as 320. I'm not sure there's clear evidence that that number's compressing. I think it's early days there, but presumably analytics can help compress that number, but when I think about things like, you know, zero day signatures, and other very high tech factors that are decades old now. Can analytics help us solve those problems? Can the technology, which kind of got us into this mess, get us out of the mess? (Monzy and Haiyan laugh) >> That's such a great point. It is the technology that just made our lives so much easier, as you know, living, and then it complicate it so much for security people. I'll give you a definitive yes, right. Analytics are there to help detect early warning signs, and it will help us, may not be able to just change the stats right now for the whole industry, I'm sure it's changing stats for a lot of the customers, especially when it comes to remediation. The more readily available the data is for you when you are sort of facing an incident, the faster you can get to the root cause and start remediate. That we have seen many of our customers talk about how it was going from weeks to days, days to hours, and that includes not just technology, but also process, right? Process streamline and automating some of the things, and freeing up the people to do the things that they're great at, versus the mundane things, trying to collect the information. So I'm also a glass half full person, optimist, that's why we work together so well, that we really think being data driven, being analytics driven, is changing the game. >> What about the technology of the malware? I think it was at a .conf, I think it was 2013, one of your guest speakers gave us an inside look at Stuxnet. Of course by then it was seven, eight years old, right? But it was fascinating, and you know you read more about it, and you learn more about it, and it's insidious. Has the technology on the defender side, I guess was my real question, accelerated to keep up with that pace? Where are we at with the bad technology and the good technology? Are they at a balance now, an equilibrium? >> I think it's going to be a constant evolutionary process. It's like anything else, you know, whether you look at thieves or whether you look at people who are trying to create new innovative solutions for themselves. I think the key that, this is the reason why I said this morning, is that defenders can have, I think I said unfair advantage, not just an advantage. And the reason for that is, some of the things Haiyan talked about, with analytics, and with the availability of technology that can create a nerve center. It's not so much so that someone can detect a certain type of threat. It's that we know the low fidelity sort of perturbations that cause us to fire an alarm, but there's so many of those that we get desensitized. The thing that's missing is, how do I connect something that is very low threshold, to another thing that's very low threshold, and sequence those things together, and then say, you know, combined all of this is a bad thing. And one of my colleagues uses as example, you know, I go to the doctor and I say you know, "I've got this headache for a long time", and the doctor says, "Don't worry, you don't have a tumor." And it's like, "Okay, great, thank you very much," (Dave laughs) but I still have the headache >> Still have the headache. >> And so this is why even in the analytics stories we use, and even in UBA and in enterprise security, we don't use the concept of a false positive. We use the concept of confidence, and we want to raise confidence in a particular situation, which is why the analytics story concept makes sense, is because within that story, the confidence keeps raising as you go farther and farther down the chain. >> So it's a confidence, but also married, presumably through analytics, with a degree of risk, right? So I can understand whether that asset is a high value asset or John's football pool or something like that. >> John: Which is going very well right now by the way. (all laugh) Bring it on, very happy. >> Now you guys have come out with some solutions for ransomware. I tweeted out this morning that I was pleased at .conf that we're talking about analytics, analytic-driven solutions to ransomware, and not just the typical, when we go these conferences, the air gap yap. Somebody tweeted back to me, said, "Dave, until we see 100% certainty with analytics-driven solutions, we better still have air gaps." So I guess I wanted, if you guys could weigh in on what should people be thinking about in terms of ransomware, in terms of an end to end solution. Can you comment? >> I will add and... So for us, right, even to follow on the last question you had, the advancement in technology is not just algorithms, it's actually the awareness and the mindset to instrument your enterprise, and the biggest information gap in an incident response is, I don't have the data, I don't know what happened. So I think there's lot of advancement happened. We did a war game, you know, tabletop exercise, that was one of the biggest takeaways. Oh we better go back and instrument our enterprise, or agency, so when something does happen, we can trace back, right? So that's number one. So ransomware's the same thing. If you have instrumented your infrastructure, your applications stack, and your cloud visibility, you can actually detect some of the anomalies early. It's never going to solve 100%. So security is all about layered defense, right. Adapting and adding more layers, because nobody is really claiming I can be 100%, so you just want to put different layers and hoping that as they sift through, you catch them along the way. >> I think it's a question of ecosystem, and really goes back to this notion that different people have instrumented their environments in different ways, they deploy different technologies. How much value can they get out of them? I think that's one vector. The other vector is, what is your risk threshold? Somebody may have absolutely zero tolerance for air gaps. But I would, as a research person, I would like to challenge even that premise. I've been privileged to work in certain environments, and there are some people who have incredible resources, and so it's just a question of what is your adversary model that you're trying to protect yourself against, what is your business model for which you're willing to take over that risk? So I don't think there is a too high endpoint, there isn't a single solution for any of these number of things. It really just has to match with your business operation or business risk posture that you want to accommodate. >> You know what, you're almost touching on a point that I did want to hit you up on before you left, about choice, and you know, it's almost like personal, how much risk am I willing to take on? It's about customization, and providing people different tools. So how much leash do you give people? I mean do you worry that if we allow you to do too much tinkering you actually do more harm than good? But how do you factor all that in to the kind of services that you're offering? >> I think that ultimately it's up to the customer to decide what's valuable and what's critical for their business. If somebody wants a complete solution from Splunk, we're going to serve those customers. You heard a number of announcements this week from ES Content updates, to opening up the SDK, you know, with UBA, to the security essentials app releases, and all of those different kinds of capabilities. On the top end of it, we have the machine learning toolkit. If you have experts that want to tinker and learn something more, and want to exert their own intuition and energy on a compute problem, we want to provide those capabilities. So it's not about us, it's about the ability for our customers to exert what is important to them, and get a significant advantage in the marketplace for their business. >> I think it's important to point out too for our audience, it's not just a technology problem. The security regimes in organizations for years has fallen on IT and security practitioners, and we wrote a piece several years ago on Wikibon Research, that bad user behavior is going to trump good security every time. And so it's everybody's responsibility. I mean it sounds like a bromide, but it's so true, and it's really part of the complete solution. You know, I mean, I presume you agree. >> Totally. Going back to the CISO Advisory Board, one of the challenges they pointed out is user accountability. That's one of the CISO's biggest challenges. It's not just technology. It's how can they train the users and make them responsible and somehow hold them accountable. I thought that was a really very interesting insight we didn't talk about before. >> Yeah, you don't want to hear my bad, but unfortunately you do. Well, we were kind of kidding before we got started, we said, "We've got an hour to chat." It seems like it was just a matter of minutes and so thank you for taking time. We could talk an hour, I think. >> Monzy: Oh easy. >> Fascinating subject. And we thank you both for your time here today, and great show. >> [Haiyan And Monzy] Thank you for having us. >> Haiyan: It's always a pleasure to be here. >> You bet, all right, thank you Haiyan and Monzy. Back with more of theCUBE here covering .conf2017 live in Washington DC.

>> Announcer: Live from Washington, D.C., it's theCUBE, covering .conf2017. Brought to you by Splunk. >> Welcome back. Here on theCUBE, we continue our coverage of .conf2017, Splunk's get together here with some 7,000 plus attendees, 65 countries, we're right on the showfloor. A lot of buzz happening down here and it's all good. Along with Dave Vellante, I'm John Walls. We are live, as I said, in our nation's capital, and we're joined by a guest who represents her organization that is a member of the Splunk4Good program. We're going to explain that in just a little bit, but Sherrie Caltagirone is the founder and executive director of the Global Emancipation Network, and Sherry, thanks for being with us. We appreciate your time. >> Thanks so much for having me on, John. >> So your organization has to do with countering and combating global trafficking, human trafficking. >> That's right. >> We think about sex trafficking, labor trafficking, but you're a participant in the Splunk4Good program, which is their ten year pledge to support organizations such as yours to the tune of up to $100 million over that ten years to all kinds of organizations. So first off, let's just talk about that process, how you got involved, and then we want to get into how you're actually using this data that you're mining right now for your work. So first off, how'd you get involved with Splunk? >> Absolutely. It was really organic in that it's a really small community. There are a lot of people in the tech space who I found really want to use their skills for good, and they're very happy to make connections between people. We had a mutual friend actually introduce me to Monzy Merza, who's the head of security here at Splunk, and he said, "I'm really passionate about trafficking, I want to help "fight trafficking, let me connect you with Corey Marshall "at Splunk4Good." The rest is really history, and I have to tell you, yes, they have pledged up to $100 million to help, and in products and services, but what's more is they really individually care about our projects and that they are helping me build things, I call them up all the time and say, "Hey let's brainstorm an idea, "let's solve a problem, "let's figure out how we can do this together, and they really are, they're part of my family. They're part of GEN and Global Emancipation Network. >> That's outstanding. The size of the problem struck me today at the keynote when we talked about, first off, the various forms of trafficking that are going on; you said up to two dozen different subsets of trafficking, and then the size and the scale of 25 to 40-some million people around the globe are suffering. >> Yeah. >> Because of trafficking conditions. That puts it all in a really different perspective. >> You're right. Those weren't even numbers that we can really fathom what that means, can we? We don't know what 20 million looks like, and you're right, there's such a wide discrepancy between the numbers. 20 million, 46 million, maybe somewhere in between, and that is exactly part of the problem that we have is that there is no reliable data. Everyone silos their individual parts of the data that they have for trafficking, all the the different stakeholders. That's government, NGOs, law enforcement, academia, it's all kinds. It runs the gamut, really, and so it's really difficult to figure out exactly what the truth is. There's no reliable, repeatable way to count trafficking, so right now it's mostly anecdotal. It's NGOs reporting up to governments that say, "We've impacted this many victims," or, "We've encountered so-and-so who said that the "trafficking ring that they escaped from had 20 other people "in it," things like that, so it's really just an estimate, and it's the best that we have right now, but with a datalet approach, hopefully we'll get closer to a real accurate number. >> So talk more about the problem and the root of the problem, how it's manifesting itself, and we'll get into sort of what we can do about it. >> Yeah. It's really interesting in that a lot of the things that cause poverty are the same things that cause trafficking. It really is, you know, people become very vulnerable if they don't have a solid source of income or employment, things like that, so they are more willing to do whatever's necessary in order to do that, so it's easy to be lured into a situation where you can be exploited, for example, the refugee crisis right now that's happening across Europe and the Middle East is a major player for trafficking. It's a situation completely ripe for this, so people who are refugees who perhaps are willing to be smuggled out of the country, illegally, of course, but then at that point they are in the mercy and the hands of the people who smuggled them and it's very easy for them to become trafficked. Things like poverty, other ways that you're marginalized, the LGBTQ community is particularly vulnerable, homeless population, a lot of the same issues that you see in other problems come up, creates a situation of vulnerability to be exploited, and that's all trafficking really is: the exploitation of one individual through force, coercion, fraud, position of authority, to benefit another person. >> These individuals are essentially what, enslaved? >> Yeah. It's modern day slavery. There's lots of different forms, as you mentioned. There's labor trafficking, and that's several different forms; it can be that you're in a brick factory, or maybe you're forced into a fishing boat for years and years. Usually they take away your passport if you are from another country. There's usually some threats. They know where your family lives. If you go tell anyone or you run away, they're going to kill your family, those sorts of things. It is, it's modern day slavery, but on a much, much bigger scale, so it's no longer legal, but it still happens. >> How does data help solve the problem? You, as an executive director, what kind of data, when you set the North Star for the organization from a data perspective, what did that look like, and how is it coming into play? >> Well, one of the benefits that we have as an organization that's countering trafficking is that we are able to turn the tables on traffickers. They are using the internet in much the way that other private enterprises are. They know that that's how they move their product, which in this case is sadly human beings. They advertise for victims online. They recruit people online. They're using social media apps and things like Facebook and Kick and Whatsapp and whatnot. Then they are advertising openly for the people that they have recruited into trafficking, and then they are trying to sell their services, so for example, everyone knows about Backpage. There's hundreds of websites like that. It runs the gamut. They're recruiting people through false job advertisements, so we find where those sites are through lots of human intelligence and we're talking to lots of people all the time, and we gather those, and we try to look for patterns to identify who are the victims, who are the traffickers, what can we do about it? The data, to get back to your original question, is really what is going to inform policy to have a real change. >> So you can, in terms of I guess the forensics that you're doing, or whatever you're doing with that data, you're looking at not only the websites, but also the communications that are being spawned by those sites and looking to where those networks are branching off to? >> Yeah. That's one of the things that we really like to try to do. Instead of getting a low-level person, we like to try to build up an entire network so we can take down an entire ring instead of just the low fish. We do, we extract all the data from the website that we can to pull out names, email addresses, physical addresses, phone numbers, things like that, and then begin to make correlations; where else have we seen those phone numbers and those addresses on these other websites that we're collecting from, or did this person make a mistake, which we love to exploit mistakes with traffickers, and are they using the same user handle on their personal Flickr page, so then we can begin to get an attribution. >> John: That happens? >> Absolutely. >> It does, yeah. >> Sherrie: Without giving away all my secrets, exactly. >> Yeah, I don't to, don't give away the store, here. How much, then, are you looking internationally as opposed to domestically, then? >> We collect right now from 22 different countries, I think 77 individual cities, so a lot of these websites are usually very jurisdictionally specific, so, you know, like Craigslist; you go into Washington state and click on Seattle, something like that. We harvest from the main trafficking points that we can. We're collecting in six different languages right now. A lot of the data that we have right now is from the U.S. because that's the easier way to start is the low-hanging fish. >> What does your partner ecosystem look like? It comprises law enforcement, local agencies, federal agencies, presumably, NGOs. Will you describe that? >> Yeah. We do, we partner with attorneys general, we partner with law enforcement, those are the sort of operational partners we look for when we have built out intelligence. Who do we give it to now, because data is useless unless we do something with it, right? So we we build out these target packages and intelligence and give it to people who can do something with it, so those are really easy people to do something with. >> How hard is that, because you've got different jurisdictions and different policies, and it's got to be like herding cats to get guys working with you. >> It is, and it's actually something that they're begging for, and so, it's a good tool that they can use to deconflict with each other, 'cause they are running different trafficking-related operations all the time, and jurisdictions, they overlap in many cases, especially when you're talking about moving people, and they're going from one state to another state, so you have several jurisdictions and you need to deconflict your programs. >> Okay, so they're very receptive to you guys coming to them with they data. >> They are; they really want help, and they're strapped for resources. These are for the most part, not technically savvy people, and this is one of the good things about our nonprofit is that it is a staff of people who are very tech-savvy and who are very patient in explaining it and making it easy and usable and consumable by our customers. >> So if I'm an NGO out there, I'm a non-profit out there, and I'm very interested in having this kind of service, what would you say to them about what they can pursue, what kind of relationship you have with Splunk and the value they're providing, and what your experience has been so far. >> It's been wonderful. I've been over at the Splunk4Good booth all day helping out and it's been wonderful to see not only just the non-profits who have come up and said, "Hey, I run a church, "I'm trying to start a homeless shelter for drug-addicted "individuals, how can you help me," and it's wonderful when you start to see the light bulbs go off between the non-profit sector and the tech sector, between the philanthropic organizations like Splunk4Good, the non-profits, and then, we can't forget the third major important part here, which is, those are the tech volunteers, these are the people who are here at the conference and who are Splunk employees and whatnot and teaching them that they can use their skills for good in the non-profit sector. >> Has cryptocurrency, where people can conduct anonymous transactions, made your job a lot more difficult? >> No, it hasn't, and there's been a lot of research that has gone into block chain analysis, so for example, Backpage, all the adds are purchased with Bitcoin, and so there's been a wonderful amount of research then, trying to time the post to when the Bitcoin was purchased, and when the transactions happen, so they've done that, and it's really successful. There are a couple of other companies who do just that, like Chainalysis, that we partner with. >> You can use data to deanonymize? >> That's correct. It's not as anonymous as people think it is. >> Love it. >> Yeah, exactly. We love to exploit those little things like that. A lot of the websites, they put their wallets out there, and then we use that. >> Dave: You're like reverse hackers. >> That's right. It's interesting that you say that, because a lot of our volunteers actually are, they're hacker hunters. They're threat and intel analysts and whatnot, and so, they've learned that they can apply the exact same methods and techniques into our field, so it's brilliant to see the ways in which they do that. >> Dave: That's a judo move on the bad guys. >> Exactly. How long does this go on for you? Is this a year-to-year that you renew, or is it a multi-year commitment, how does that work? >> It's a year-to-year that we renew our pledge, but they're in it for the long haul with us, so they know that they're not getting rid of me and nor do they want me to, which is wonderful. It's so good, because they help, they sit at the table with me, always brainstorming, so it's year-to-year technically, but I know that we're in it together for the long haul. >> How about fundraising? A big part of your job is, you know. >> Of course it is. >> Fundraising. You spend a lot of time there. Maybe talk about that a little bit. >> Yeah, absolutely. Some of our goals right now, for example, is we're really looking to hire a full-time developer, we want a full-time intelligence analyst, so we're always looking to raise donations, so you could donate on our website. >> John: Which is? >> Which is globalemancipation.ngo. Globalemancipation.ngo. We're also always looking for people who are willing to help donate their time and their skills and whatnot. We have a couple of fundraising goals right now. We're always looking for that. We receive a lot of product donations from companies all over the world, mostly from the tech sector. We're really blessed in that we aren't spending a lot of money on that, but we do need to hire a couple of people so that's our next big goal. >> I should have asked you this off the top. Among your titles, executive director and founder, what was the founder part? What motivated you to get involved in this, because it's, I mean, there are a lot of opportunities to do non-profit work, but this one found you, or you found it. >> That's right. It's a happy circumstance. I've always done anti-human trafficking, since my college days, actually. I started volunteering, or I started to intern at the Protection Project at Johns Hopkins University, which was a legislative-based program, so it was really fantastic, traveling the world, helping countries draft legislation on trafficking, but I really wanted to get closer and begin to measure my impact, so that's when I started thinking about data anyways, to be able to put our thumb, is what we're doing. Working. How are we going to be able to measure success and what does that look like? Then I started volunteering for a rescue operations organization; the sort of knock down the doors, go rescue people group, and so, I really liked having the closer impact and being able to feel like hey, I can do something about this problem that I know is terrible and that's why it spread. A lot of the people I worked with, including my husband, come from the cyberthreat intelligence world, so I feel like those ideas and values have been steeped in me, slowly and surely, over the last decade, so that just ages myself a little bit maybe, but yes, so those ideas have been percolating over time, so it just kind of happened that way. >> Well, you want to feel young, hang around with us. (laughing) I should speak for myself, John, I'm sorry. >> No, no, you're right on, believe me. I was nodding my head right there with you. >> Can you comment on the media coverage? Is it adequate in your view? Does there need to be more? >> On trafficking itself? You know, it's really good that it's starting to come into the forefront a lot more. I'm hearing about it. Five years ago, most of the time, if I told people that there are still people in slavery, it didn't end with the Civil War, they would stand at me slackjawed. There have been a few big media pushes. There's been some films, like Taken, Liam Neeson's film, so that's always the image I use, and that's just one type of trafficking, but I'm hearing more and more. Ashton Kutcher runs a foundation called Thorn that's really fantastic and they do a similar mission to what I do. He has been able to raise the spotlight a lot. Currently there's a debate on the floor of the Senate right now, too, talking about section 230 of the CDA, which is sort of centered around the Backpage debate anyway. Where do we draw the line between the freedom of speech on the internet, with ESPs in particular, but being able to still catch bad guys exactly. The Backpage sort of founder idea. It's really hot and present in the news right now. I would love to see the media start to ask questions, drill down into the data, to be able to ask and answer those real questions, so we're hoping that Global Emancipation Network will do that for the media and for policy makers around the world. >> Well it is extraordinary work being done by an extraordinary person. It's a privilege to have you on with us, here on theCUBE. We thank you, not only for the time, but for the work you're doing, and good luck with that. >> Thank you very much for having me on. I really appreciate it. >> You bet. That's the Global Emancipation Network. Globalemancipation.ngo right? Fundraising, always helpful. Back with more here on theCUBE in Washington D.C., right after this. (electronic beats)