 security themselves. Our next talk will catalog Ring's Wrongs and EFF's campaign against these practices. We present Bill Buttington with Ring's Wrongs, Surveillance Capitalism, Law Enforcement Contracts, and User Tracking. Hi there, my name is Bill Buttington and I work for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. I'm here to present today on Ring's Wrongs, Surveillance Capitalism, Law Enforcement Contracts, and User Tracking. So first of all, before I get into that, what is the Electronic Frontier Foundation? We are a digital rights non-profit based in the San Francisco Bay Area. We consist of this mythical tripores of technologists, lawyers, and activists. Technologists like myself work on projects like HTTPS everywhere, which encrypts the web when it can. And we also work on Privacy Badger, which is a browser plugin that protects your browser from trackers. Our lawyers have worked on historic cases like Bernstein versus the Department of Justice, which made encryption possible up to this present day. And our activists basically work on organizing communities against surveillance like the type that we're going to see today. We fight for encryption, privacy, and security on the internet. You can find us online at EFF.org. Who am I and why do you listen to me? Well, I'm a senior staff technologist at the EFF. I was the lead developer of HTTPS Everywhere from 2015 to 2018. And I'm currently the lead developer of Panopticlink. I also work as a digital security trainer for groups of activists, journalists, and nonprofits. And most relevant for today's talk, I am a privacy and security auditor for apps like Ring. So what is Ring? Ring is a company that was founded in 2013 and was acquired by Amazon in 2017 for an undisclosed amount in the ballpark of $1.2 to $1.8 billion. They built home security systems, which are another way of saying really terrible surveillance apparatuses. All this data is channeled into Amazon servers, like footage from cameras. So Ring produces these cameras that can be pointed at the street, can be built into your home alarm system, and can even kind of enable smart lighting if you are walking through a path. But their flagship product is the Ring Doorbell. So what is the Ring Doorbell? This is what it looks like, and it's a smart doorbell which alerts you when someone is at your door, I think motion activated, so it starts recording when someone shows up at your door, and also allows for two-way communication between yourself and whoever is out there. It allows you to see them in real-time on your phone with the Ring app. So what is the Ring app? Well this is kind of what it looks like. It's available for iOS and Android, also for Windows 10 and Mac OS, and it allows you to get real-time footage of the Ring Doorbell that you have installed, or also historical footage that you've taken before. So the Ring app, oops, so Ring's videos can be shared either to your friends or also to law enforcement if you used to choose, but really kind of there's this social function that Ring tries to tie into, and this is a neighbor's app. It's kind of a neighborhood watch app. It looks a lot like Next Door where you have these alerts that are in your neighborhood if something fishy happens. So if you have real-time crime alerts that are sent to your door, you can have push notifications that are sent to you, and it goes all to your phone in real-time. There are some real huge social ills caused by Ring, which is part of the surveillance, what I call surveillance industrial complex. One is paranoia. Two is this sense of racial bias and racial bias being a real part that's embedded into this technology. The erosion of the public sphere is another big part of this, and the ownership of data going from you into the cloud. First of all, let's get into police partnerships and how that causes some of the paranoia that we're talking about. Ring partners with law enforcement throughout the country. It's not just in one particular locale, and what happens is that Ring provides them with access to this vast surveillance apparatus that they never dreamed of. Ring exploits a relationship between the trust that is in place in police and public servants, and they use that to broaden their customer base in general. This has caused this kind of inappropriate relationship between public servants and private industry. To take an analogy, it would be completely inappropriate if I was a car dealership and I went to the police offering them a new car, and I said, you can have this new car, but only if you promise to promote my dealership. There's a word for that. It's actually called bribery, but in this case, because it's part of some kind of surveillance system, it looks like we're doing public service. What this amounts to is this completely inappropriate relationship between the private sector and public servants. How do they form these police partnerships? They do this aggressive outreach to police. In an example that we have from Trula Vista in Southern California, they applied a year of pressure to Trula Vista police, sending them emails, offering them discounts, mentioning that neighboring police departments had already signed up for the Ring system. They also pointed out, kind of a shaming tactic almost, that Trula Vista had an increasing crime. They mentioned this study that we can solve that if only you sign up for the Ring program in a study that has since been debunked. They say that their doorbell will decrease crime, but their initial reports of this were debunked by MIT. In this quote, it says, I'm not sure if peer pressure is a good thing or not, but I just wanted to make you aware that neighboring police departments are joining the program and will be onboarded shortly. You see this real peer pressure coming to bear. It's been successful. You've seen rapid expansion of law enforcement partnerships across the country. We've seen this graph that they had a rapid expansion in starting 2019 and all the way to 2020 to the current day. They're really getting a lot of police to sign up for Ring. 1,400 agencies in all have partnerships with Ring and 600 in the last six months alone. Not only is Ring selling its products to the police, police are basically assigned to pedal Ring's surveillance cameras onto their citizens. In this motherboard article, it says that in this case, they're contractually obligated to promote Ring products once they sign up for them. In the city of Arcadia, you can see this example of like, look at how there's a big sale of $100 off when a free Ring doorbell police and public servant police who are interested to be public servants are really starting to sell this onto the public as a way to apparently, you think, keep yourself safe. They're using public money to do it. Look at this graphic here. It looks like a professional graphic designer has made this. What we're seeing is public money is being funneled into the police and the police are promoting a private product that's being used to surveil the public in general. So once you sign up for Ring, once you get a Ring camera, police have you mapped. So police are given a list of Ring cameras that are active once a person signs up once they sign up to be a partner of Ring. And what happens is that they have the ability to do a reverse map lookup on anywhere that they want to surveil. So if there is some incident or they want to surveil something in a certain block, they can take a five block radius of all the active cameras in that area. And Amazon actually creates these maps and delivers them right to any police that are partnered with Ring. So they basically say, here's all the cameras we have access to. So more cameras for us. So you'll have more access to footage. This is an example of one of the maps that police can see of Ring cameras that are active in their jurisdiction. In addition, the police that are partnered with Ring are providing Ring a real time tap into their computer aided dispatch system. So what computer aided dispatch is the system that was developed in the 1990s in order for emergency responders to get to the scene quickly and help people out when they're in danger. But what you see is that the police are actually just giving this data over to Ring in order to feed into their neighbors at crime news alerts. In this way, push alerts can be sent directly to phones, citizens, and it goes into the system that instills fear and drives more sales for Ring cameras once people are worried about what's happening in their neighborhood. In addition, they've been involved or at least interested in deploying facial recognition technologies with their Ring cameras to create watch lists of what's a suspicious character in a neighborhood. There's a real lack of transparency that's happening here. In the words of my colleague, Matthew Gariglia, there's a reason why Amazon was able to build up hundreds of police partnerships before journalists and civil liberties advocates even knew about it. The reason for that is because they've been required to keep secret about it. In Lakeland, Florida, police departments signed this secret agreement to encourage adoption of Ring and secretive contracts have been used or been, you know, police have been required to sign to keep the terms of their partnership with Ring confidential. These are, you know, not only is it a secret agreement, but often they've fed the press line directly to the police, like we have seen in Bloomfield, New Jersey, where the entirety almost of a press release that the police put out was drafted by Ring. And when the police said something that Ring didn't like, Ring had them go back and correct it. So Amazon's Ring police partnerships have actually even raised concern of the security industry groups that they are supposedly in the same industry of. They've gotten so bad that they've even made the surveillance industry worried. This causes this kind of feedback loop where police promote the Ring cameras and then Ring sells more cameras and they're able to do more outreach to police. And then Ring's customers get really paranoid and they contact the police more and this in terms needs more paranoia via, for instance, the neighbor's app. And this fear drives more sales of Ring cameras and more neighborhood surveillance. So there's this feedback loop that happens. The main takeaway from this is, well, for you, not to give into neighborhood paranoia. These are literally your neighbors that we're talking about that we're pointing cameras at. This isn't some, you know, Ocean's 11 type casino heist. We've seen that in the U.S. According to the FBI, violent crime has actually steadily been declining over the last few decades since its post 1970 height. And we're actually at the safest point that we've almost ever been at. But the paranoia that drives the sales of Ring cameras is required to have more Ring cameras, to more people to install them for police to have more access to footage. So this is a real problem that is really unbounded. People are already safe. And there's this huge racial bias problem. So in the next door app, you have instances of real, I would say just straight out racism, where people that are darker skin going through a neighborhood prompts a resident to take up an arm and follow them. And these instances have caused the next door CEO, Sarah Friar, to really address the problems in her platform, to hire racial bias trainers or people that train racial bias out of people, to train racial bias, to train moderators of next door to look for racial bias in posts and try to mitigate the instances of that. But Ring hasn't done the same. There's this huge problem of erosion of the public sphere that Ring cameras cause. So Ring in transmitting all these fears the American suburbs causes people to point their cameras at each other. And we in turn caused this big surveillance network that we're a part of to voluntarily create a surveillance network out of all of us. In addition, Ring has actually set up a tiered discount system. And especially communities or cities that have partnered with Ring have promoted, or some of them have promoted Ring cameras by how much a person that installs a Ring camera is able to pick up the public. So in this instance, if you're able to install a Ring camera that can get at your front porch or driveway, then you're given a 40% discount or you're given a 60% discount when you can surveil the entire block. So this is really disturbing. This means that municipalities are encouraging people to erode the public sphere, to make us that if you're walking down the street, you don't have the same privacy expectations as you had before. In addition, there's this problem of cloud storage and warrants. In traditional police work, if an incident happens, a police officer goes to the neighborhood where it happened, tries to take notes, look at cameras that are installed on a pole over there or in front of a business over here. And once those cameras have been identified, go to the owners of the cameras and ask for that footage. And that entails user notification. So the business knows when they've been asked or their footage has been asked for. In addition, if they choose not to give over that data voluntarily, then the police can go through some kind of due process, go to a court, get a judge to sign a warrant to get access to the footage if it's reasonable. This entails a certain amount of de facto rate limiting, where if police have to go to separate businesses to get footage, then they can't automatically get a bunch of footage all at once. They have to kind of do some amount of legwork each step of the way. In turn, what's happening now is that Amazon is able to bypass user notification. So if someone who installs a ring camera is doesn't want to give over that footage, then the police can go directly to Amazon and say, hey, we want the footage, turn it over. Amazon also gives them pointing click access to this footage so that whatever portal that they give to the police is able to use that to get the footage of a massive swath of their jurisdiction. And the footage, according to Amazon, is actually owned by Amazon. When you sign up for a ring, you are forced to basically agree to this terms of service that is completely overly broad. To quote it, you hear by Grant Ring and its licensees an unlimited, irrevocable, fully paid and royalty free perpetual worldwide rights to exploit shared content for any purpose. That's pretty damn broad, if you ask me. And with all this information entrusted to Ring, you'd expect that their security practices would be top notch. Unfortunately, that's not the case at all. As recently as February 2019, we've seen footage being sent in the clear according to Bullgaard security and their encryption when they send footages was completely inadequate. It actually allowed the security researchers in this instance to not only see feeds, but to inject their own feeds into the Ring doorbell system. So they were able to inject footage of their own that they prepared to make it look like it came from a specific ring camera. That's pretty frightening. And in December 2019, this incident happened. I'm your best friend. As eight year old Alyssa LeMay stood in her room, a terrifying voice spoke to her. I'm Santa Claus. Don't you want to be my best friend? The horrifying sound coming from this Ring security camera installed in the child's bedroom, which she shares with her two sisters. I come upstairs and I hear some banging noise. I was like, who is that? For five minutes, the voice taunting the young girl, playing strange music, even instructing her to destroy her room. You can mess up your room. You can break your TV. You can do whatever you want. The LeMay family installed the camera just days before the device was apparently hacked. I watched the video and I mean, like, they could watch them sleeping. They could have watched them changing. I mean, they could have seen all kinds of things. This just the latest hack of an in-home security camera over the week. So some pretty disturbing things that have been caused by the lackluster security of Ring itself. And just a week after that happened, 36,000 accounts of Ring were breached due to a credential stuffing attack. So what a credential stuffing attack means is that a hack happens a site that is not Ring. And then some hackers use the credentials that have been found on Ring's login portal and try to log in. What's interesting about this incident is that 3600 accounts had the same passwords and Ring kind of tried to place the blame on its customers for this breach. It said, you know, well, you need to, you know, choose secure passwords, but it itself wasn't using the basic standards of web application security that we've seen in trust, you know, when websites which are entrusted to you so much sensitive data have access to all this data, you need to actually lock down those accounts. They were credential stuffing, you know, involved taking hundreds of thousands of hacked accounts and then trying logins. And in 3600 cases, this was successful on this. And when that many logins happen, it means there's a lot of logins that don't succeed, that accounts that don't get hacked. And this means that hackers were trying over and over again and not getting in, failed password attempts. They had to have some kind of rate limiting system in place in order to secure down their site, which they didn't have. They also didn't mandate two-factor authentication, which for the sensitivity of their footage, they should have been doing. But yeah, this resulted in a big breach for Ring. And in January 2020, four Ring employees got fired for basically accessing footage in an unauthorized manner. And these were employees which were not, you know, top-tier system administrators. These were four low-level Ring employees that got fired, which means that Amazon employees can just see your data. These employees were able to just access all data on Ring cameras and the footage on Ring cameras. And so that's really quite a disturbing insight into how seriously they take their data. So with all this, we decided to take on Ring. We pointed out their privacy threats. We pointed out their shady dealings with the police. We talked about how Congress got involved. And we also let people know about how they were throwing their own customers under the bus. Now, unfortunately, this didn't get Ring's attention in the way that we would have liked. But we thought that one person might be able to get Ring's attention. That person is Shaquille O'Neal. Yep, that Shaquille O'Neal. Weirdly enough, Shaq is a deputized cop, which you wouldn't expect to be a traditional career path after being in the NBA. But yeah, so we launched this campaign. All right, police departments can now use an app to access footage uploaded by Ring users. The company says its goal is to eventually have every law enforcement agency in the country on its police portal. Look at that, Shaq. The whole backyard is insane. Shaq, come sit down with us one-on-one and hear how these law enforcement partnerships with Ring are threatening Americans' rights. People buy these thinking they're just buying a camera. But really, they're selling their own privacy. With one click, police can request footage from any Ring camera. And even if you refuse, they can go directly to Amazon with a warrant and obtain footage from your door. And it's not just your privacy. It's your friends and your neighbor's privacy too. Don't forget your neighbor's Ring camera is pointing at your house. Shaq, EFF has been fighting the surveillance state since you were at Louisiana State. We know how technologies like Ring can harm our communities. If we wanted help learning how to dunk, we'd come to you. If you want to learn how ubiquitous surveillance puts us all in danger, you should come to us. We'll be waiting. So we launched this nothing but drag net campaign, which we thought was pretty great. But unfortunately, it didn't have the results that we desired. Shaq didn't want to sit down with us. Didn't really give us much time. But someone did notice, and that someone is actually five, someone's five senators that demanded some information from Ring. These senators were from Oregon, Maryland, Delaware, Michigan, and Massachusetts, and were particularly concerned about the ability of Ukrainian Ring employees to have virtually unfettered access to Ring's footage. So it's not just US employees. Ukrainian employees of Ring can get footage from all across the world. So with this, we decided to look at Ring's app and investigate what's going on with the Ring app. We found it to be packed with third party trackers. And these trackers, well, first of all, we were investigating Ring 3.21.1 on Android. And we found four major marketing and analytics firms, branch.io, mixpanel.com, outspire, and Facebook. And here you can see some of, oops, so this is kind of startling because they have a page where they're supposed to mention the third party services that they offer. But out of the four that we found, only mixpanel was mentioned. So they were not mentioning these three other analytics companies and marketing companies that they included in their app, which is really disturbing given the breadth of information that was being delivered. For instance, in branch.io's case, you have persistent, unique identifiers like hardware ID, identity ID, fingerprint ID, device fingerprint. And these are separate from what, for instance, if you look at Android settings, marketing, or advertising ID, those can be randomized. Those are in user's control in some way, shape, or form. These aren't. These will persist even if you clear your advertising ID and the operating system level. It also has things like language, your local IP address for your home network, Android version, and screen, DPI, and also if you're using Wi-Fi or not. So here are some of the data that was collected by Facebook, branch, outspire, and mixpanel. And mixpanel by far got the most data. They got users full names, email addresses, device info, Bluetooth enabled or not. So not only do these companies know about specific information about their device, they know all sorts of personal details about you. And really, what's startling is that even if they have little bits of information, the danger in sending even small bits of information to analytics and tracking companies is that they have technologies that can combine these bits of data into fingerprints that form a unique picture of your device and follow you around with your usage of that device. So just to speak to some of the methodology that we used in this case, we used a piece of technology called Midam Proxy, which is able to intercept even HTTPS traffic by installing a forged certificate authority in your phone. But that didn't work for some reason. And we were curious about that. So we also used Frida, which is this dynamic analysis toolkit, which allows you to basically get in the way when a certificate validation is happening and spoofs this part of Android's Java API, which is called Trust Factory, which authenticates websites and says, yep, instead of actually authenticating, it just says, yep, you're good. So in this case, we were able to get our own certificate to accept it in the app and view that traffic. So this caused a big media splash. New York Times had this article with a very creepy graphic, saying, your doorbell on camera is spied on you. Now what? Los Angeles Times had this ringing out shares your personal data with Facebook and others report fines and the Guardian reported on it as well as a whole bunch of other media organizations. Ring's response was this. Well, two factor indication is mandatory. So that's actually a good step forward. Okay. All right, let's see what else. So they will temporarily renew some third party trackers, which to me is completely meaningless. Which third party trackers and how long? And, you know, we give opt out for trackers used in marketing. You know, what's crazy about this whole thing is that Ring is already profiting from police partnerships, from you buying their Ring camera, but they also wanted to profit from you as a Ring customer giving your data to them. So they take your data and they use that for marketing purposes and for non-marketing purposes. But don't worry, you're allowed to opt out, meaning you have to actively take part in opting out from your personal data being used to track you. This doesn't address the fundamental problems that we had brought up in our blog post and in our activism. Ring must and the rapid expansion of police partnerships. Ring must allow users to give access, scoped access to police so that if they come to you seeking information on a particular crime, they can't use that information to charge someone else with another crime or just hand it over to another police department. Ring must turn off automatic audio recording on motion activation so that if I'm walking across the street and your Ring camera is pointed at me, that my phone call isn't recorded by you. And finally, just no facial recognition, just don't do it. And also implement measures, and this is a really interesting point, implement measures that require warrants to be served to device owners and not to Amazon because of that notification principle because then you can refuse to hand that over and then they have to go and get a warrant for it. We thought about how this would be possible technologically to implement. So we kind of thought about this in terms of encryption that Amazon could implement in their Ring end-to-end encryption for Ring to protect footage. So end-to-end encryption for Ring footage, what would that mean? Well, it would mean that you encrypt devices locally on, say, or sorry, you encrypt footage locally on, say, the Ring doorbell and then when you upload it, the cloud gets that footage, but they only get an encrypted form of that footage. So Amazon themselves can't decrypt that footage. It actually reestablishes this principle that I talked about before of de facto rate limiting in traditional police investigations where requests are given on an individual basis. Police will still have to go to each Ring device owner and ask for that footage and then the device owner can choose whether they want to give that footage over or not. It puts that legwork that has been so vital in just ensuring that police aren't able to get everything all the time and puts that rate limiting, reestablishes that rate limiting. And finally, in so doing, it gives users notification that their footage is being requested and it removes the case where you have nosy Ring employees trying to get at their neighbors or their ex-girlfriends or boyfriend's footage. So there have been some recent developments as well. In the first quarter of 2020, we found because of the congressional request to Ring that 5,000 times Ring or police have requested footage from Ring doorbells. This is just the first quarter of 2020 alone. So when the Black Lives Matter protests started happening, Amazon released this statement that was in lip service to Black Lives Matter and lip service to protecting the lives of Black people in the U.S. And what we see is that when they're actually just giving this automated system of surveillance that can be used on protesters across the country to police, how is that in any way in solidarity? How is that in any way just? How is that not enabling the very violence that people are protesting against? Over a third, we found of police encounters that have caused a fatality have been by police that have been partnered with Ring. This has led us to conclude that Ring's enabling police violence in the most deadly of police forces, like the Louisville, Kentucky municipal police that took the life of Breonna Taylor earlier this year. So Ring stokes fears and racial prejudices in our society. This was an article by CBS News where the racial prejudices and paranoias that are in American society are being stoked by programs like Ring. And they actually produced a small documentary, if you want to check it out, called Racial Profiling in 2.0, detailing some of their findings. And in a quote in that article, these apps are dangerous because they not only reflect people's biases about marginalized people, but these apps legitimize that bias as an effective guide for addressing crime. And that's a quote by Mialisha Hayes, director at Media Justice. And that quote really drives home the point that these biases are already there. But when you have systems that really stoke those paranoias, that it causes people to view everyone with a suspicion, view their neighbors with suspicion, see someone just crossing the street or just taking a walk, see them as a suspicious character, especially if they already have those biases. And it results in tragedy. Ring's reaction to all this and their criticism, our criticism about their enabling racial bias has been pretty terrible. So they've actually gamified the process of reporting your neighbors for suspicious activity. They've created programs where our neighbors, you're incentivized to report on whatever activity you might think or deem as suspicious. This quote, at the end of it, kind of just drives home. It seems to incentivize reckless behavior. This is dangerous and irresponsible and it's going to result in tragedy. What can we do about it? First of all, there are these initiatives called community control over police surveillance. And what it does is if a police force wants to buy surveillance equipment, then they're forced to do it through a process that's transparent to the community that goes to the city council, for instance, and makes it so that they have to get it approved. So it puts control back in the hands of citizens when their police want to burn some spy on them. Secondly, well, firstly, just to go back to that point, support those initiatives. If they're happening in your community, support them. If they're not happening in your community, talk to your city councilor. They're public servants too and make sure that they know about CCOP's initiatives and might want to bring it up in your city. Secondly, if you're thinking about getting a ring camera, then maybe just reconsider. Thirdly, if you have a ring product, then contact Ring about all the concerns that we have brought up here in this talk. Hopefully, you're like me and have these real concerns about the injurious effect that it has on our society. So you can actually just talk to them and say, I'm a customer. I'm mad as hell about it. And don't give in to fearmongering and paranoia. Don't give in to that system. Finally, you can support our work at EFF. You can go to act.eff.org and sign our petition telling Amazon, telling Ring that they should end their police partnerships. And you can donate to us at supporters.eff.org and support our work. Support our work in informing the public, in forums like this. So thanks very much. And I think it's time for questions and answers. This is Rings Wrongs, Surveillance, Capitalism, Law Enforcement Contracts, and User Tracking with Bill Buddington. Bill, thank you very much for joining us today. Thanks for having me. We have just a few minutes for a quick Q&A. If those of you in our Matrix Chat audience can post your questions to the livestream channel, they will be relayed here. One question we got early on is, is there a free software alternative to Ring? I know how to add a webcam to an SPC with a button, but is there an ethical alternative that regular people can purchase? Yeah, so I think there are a lot of options out there for IP cameras. Some of them are more or less cloud connected than others. And certainly any other option than Ring is going to not have the problem of police partnerships across the country. There is an open source alternative that I have used in the past called RPi CAM web interface. So basically you just take a Raspberry Pi, if you're technically inclined to do so, just take a Raspberry Pi, probably RPi 3 or above, not this whole thing. And then you connect one of these little camera modules to it. And then once you install that software, it will allow you to do some of the same thing as you can do motion detection, and it will start recording and things like that. So yeah, there are some options out there. I think that any option out there right now is better than Ring because of all the problems I've stated. Yeah, I also know the latest Pis have some crazy high quality camera options for them. So that's worth looking into. A member of the audience asks, do you have a list of police departments that work with Amazon? So we're lied on reporting by motherboard advice and other agencies. I think that we do have a list that we can usually look up. If you use the Ring app, it will tell you now if you have this kind of control panel, whether your own police department is partnered with Ring. But yeah, I think that list is available. I'm just not sure exactly where. I can follow up with that. Another viewer asks, do you know if other Amazon-owned security cameras like LinkXT2 are included in the same police access process? So no, Ring, this is a Ring-specific program that they've been partnering with Police specifically Ring has been for, you know, well, they've been kind of catering these relationships alongside, at the same time when they were bought by Amazon. So yeah, I wouldn't expect the same level of partnership between other cameras owned by Ring, or sorry, other cameras owned by Amazon, and, you know, Sicily on the police partnership access. Another member of the audience asks, if they're recording audio conversations to which they're not party, doesn't this violate criminal law in like every state? So it really depends on the state. There are some states that require two-party consent to record audio. There are some states that require only one party consent to record audio. So it really depends on your specific state whether you live in a one-party or two-party state. I would refer that question to our lawyers in order to answer that because I'm not aware of myself. While we've just got a minute left while we're wrapping up, can you tell us, once again, where people can go who are interested in the subject to get further info about your work and how to contact you? Yeah, for sure. You can just email me bill at EFF.org. You can look on our deep links blog posts, or just go to EFF.org slash Ring, and that has a lot more info that you check out. Excellent. Bill, thank you very much for joining us today at Hope 2020. Thanks.