 So right now we're developing the standards for let's say the advanced components of a FinTech security like the cryptocurrencies, fiat currencies, stuff like that. So we're trying to articulate how to actually protect that from an end-to-end point of view to the right level of assurance. So today it's more of a conversation of okay we know how to apply security per se to what level do we have to apply it. Because more costs money and so that's a business decision. Well if you look at how we evolved in security in the advanced industrial economies, it's really an evolution that has resulted in multiple frameworks authored by multiple groups. So it's actually a very costly and complex thing to address. So for example the new CEO of EcoFax announced on March 19th that they were investing 1.25 additional billion dollars in security and hiring an additional 1,000 people. Well there isn't 1,000 people per se to find and not everyone has 1.25 billion to throw to security. So the point being is security today is protection for the rich. And we're connecting to the rest of the world extremely fast and they're less protected. So how are they going to be protected so that when they connect to us we're all protected. So security inclusion now is a call to action that in essence we use an innovation that exists to reduce the amount of humans involved in the particular process which they're not doing a very good job at, the process of security control management. It is not a human conducive activity to track minutia. So the problem is is there a way that we can convert worded statements into a syntax language that can be understood by computers in which case we would solve a large part of the problem and reduce cost and complexity of security which is security inclusion now. So if you look at security controls and security control frameworks that are authored by diverse standards development organizations they're all in essence about the same topic, the application of security controls but they're authored by different organizations in a worded format so they're different and they all have to be read, interpreted, validated, verified and that entire process is called the audit and control industry. You know controls what do I have to do, what do I have to do to show that, that's what makes it so complicated and costly. It's the reconciliation between all these frameworks and how do you know that one is complete versus another, there's no way to visualize that. So the objective is to make all security controls independent of who authored them and so that they can become mass interoperatable with no effort. So this requires what I call the security genome project to be initiated where a bunch of experts would not only define the terms involved in security but define them in a single parent tree structure where you can increase precision as you go down the tree. So one if we adopt a syntax language that allows the worded control to be transformed into a unique and unambiguous statement then that'll make all controls interoperable, make things crystal clear and even perhaps machine readable which would be a precursor to automation. So if we want to automate security, get humans kind of out of the way because they're too slow this would be a precursor to what would be required in order to enable the automation of threat detection patterns and countermeasures. Okay, so the Unified Security Model is the first industry model that combines what I call amount of security and quality of security. So I don't use the word security very often, it's more protection, am I actually getting protection? And protection is a combination of amount of it which is tied to money and quality of it which is tied to expertise. So the Unified Security Model is the first model that actually addresses the residual risk remaining after you've provided your protection all the way down to the controls that are implemented via actual assets delivering that protection. So right now we've got chasms and disconnects between the fiduciary risk management layer and the implementation delivery layer and the Unified Security Model links those two and eliminates two major friction paths that the industry has. How do you go from measuring and knowing your actual implemented state of control and articulating how that fulfills a set of objectives in this framework versus this framework which is very difficult to do and industry spends billions on that process. The USM eliminates that friction path, you can go right from knowledge of actual implemented to instantly knowing how they fulfill controls in many frameworks. So that's security inclusion now, methods where we can dramatically reduce the cost and complexity of delivering security.