Yea, so, well, who might be attacking a medical device that's connected might turn on, why they wouldn't attack it? So, you know, it's hard to--we don't have a recorded instance of somebody attacking a medical device like a pacemaker. There's lots of research on it in the lab but you can think of two scenarios at least. One is somebody trying to inflict harm, right? So, they, someone has a pacemaker or an insulin pump, and someone who's trying to harm them would attempt to access, to gain unauthorized access to their medical device, to cause harm, right? And you could hypothesize, based on who the individual is and what kind of harm they, they are thinking about inflicting, who the other entity might be. So, if we're talking about a political figure, their medical device potentially being hacked or maybe an Olympic athlete. There are a number of instances where there might be another player, an enemy, another state, a competitor in the business space, who would have an incentive to affect one's, the performance of one's medical device in a way that is clearly illegal. I mean, let me be clear, but I think the incentive is clearly going to be there. People have been hurting each other as long as, as long as humans have been around, and this is not going to stop when, when we enter the world of connected implantable medical devices. The other thing that I think is potentially a bigger threat, that's the sort of, that's the scary homeland scenario, right? The vice president gets a pacemaker that's wirelessly connected and then terrorists managed to hack in and kill the vice president. That's a real concern and I think it would be smart, as Vice President Cheney did to much ridicule, to turn off the wireless features of your pacemaker, if you think you're a high value target. The other scenario in which, the other reason people might try to gain access to a medical device is to collect information about the user. And, here I think there's a real concern. So, just imagine one example is an insurance company who wants to know about the medical conditions that their subscribers have. It might seem far fetched that an insurance company would attempt to gain access to that information, but they might not even know that they're attempting to gain it, like say that they try to get information, say that they subscribe to a service that gives them information about consumers in the marketplace like many companies do. And then that service attempts to gain access to all this information like browsing history, behavioral patterns, and it's only a few steps down the chain to try to figure out how's your heart doing if someone can get access to that information. So, securing that information seems critical to me from both a personal health standpoint but also from a privacy securing one's data standpoint. And this is the kind of thing that comes up in, in a number of different contexts, I mean, you can imagine, it's not just that your, your heart device if, let's, say it's a pacemaker, right? And it's wirelessly connected and it's connected to a network and you think as long as I stay on a safe network I'm going to be okay. Typically these devices have at least two radios so you're not going to always know how someone might be penetrating the device. In the future they will likely have more than two radios, you know, but we, but we pass through portals where people are scanning our, the signals that our technology is giving off all the time.
